Comparative Criminology A Text Book Vol-two

COMPARATIVE CRIMINOLOGY
A TEXT BOOK

VOLUME TWO

INTERNATIONAL LIBRARY OF SOCIOLOGY
AND SOCIAL RECONSTRUCTION

Founded by Karl Mannheim
Editor: W. J. H. Sprott

A catalogue of the books available in the INTERNATIONAL LIBRARY OF
SOCIOLOGY AND SOCIAL RECONSTRUCTION, and new books in
preparation for the Library will be found at the end of this volume.

COMPARATIVE

CRIMINOLOGY

A TEXT BOOK
by

HERMANN MANNHEIM

In Two Volumes:
Volume Two

LONDON

ROUTLEDGE & KEGAN PAUL

First published 1965
by Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd
Broadway House, 68-74 Carter Lane
London, E.C.4

Second impression 1966

Printed in Great Britain
by Butler & Tamer Ltd
Frame and London

© Hermann Mannheim 1965

No part of this book may be reproduced
in any form without permission from
the publisher, except for the quotation
of brief passages in criticism

Contents

VOLUME TWO

PART FOUR: THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

19 OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY K A PRELIMINARY SURVEY page 419

20 OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY IK SOCIAL CLASS AND CLASS

CONFLICT: THEIR CRIMINOLOGICAL IMPLICATIONS 444

21 OUR CRIMINOGENIQ.^OCIETY IIK WHITE COLLAR .AND OTHER

‘non-working-class’ ''CRIMES *‘-i >’ ' 469

22 CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES OF CRIMINAL SOCIOLOGY. IN

particular: anoX&d-And the criminal subculture 499

23 non-class-oriented theories, in particular: the ECO-

LOGICAL THEORY. CULTURE CONFLICT. •’ RACIAL AND
OTHER MINORITIES. ECONOMIC FACTORS. THE EFFECT OF

WARS AND OTHER CRISES. DIFFERENTIAL ASSOCIATION 532

24 GROUPS AS FACTORS IN CRIME K A. PRIMARY GROUPS:

FAMILY AND SCHOOL 606

25 GROUPS AS FACTORS IN CRIME IK B. ASSOCIATIONS IN CRIME:

OCCASIONAL CO-OPERATION OF A FEW. THE CROWD.
ORGANIZED CRIME: ADULT AND ADOLESCENT GANGS. THE
VICTIM OF CRIME 636

26 AGB AND SEX FACTORS IN CRIME 677

SELECTED READING LISTS 709

NOTES 716

APPENDIX 751

I. Societies

II. Institutes

III. Journals

IV. Bibliographies

V. Textbooks

VI. Encyclopaedias

VII. Readings

index of subjects {both volumes) 765

index of names ( both volumes ) 779

PART FOUR

The Sociology of Crime

Chapter 19

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY I:

A PRELIMINARY SURVEY

I. A FEW BASIC CONCEPTS

The sociology of crime 1 has as its main object the relationships
between society and its individual or corporate members as far as
these relationships may have some bearing on crime. Moreover, as
mentioned in our methodological chapters, the criminological sig-
nificance of certain social institutions, of certain areas, and of the age
and sex factors are also within the scope of the sociological approach
to crime, although age and sex have important biological and psycho-
logical implications and areas have important physical aspects, too.
Before going into the details of all these problems certain preliminary
observations are, however, not out of place. The sociological inter-
pretation of crime is, perhaps even more than its biological and
psychological counterparts, affected by the subjective value judgments
of the individual observer.

A society can be understood and judged only against the back-
ground of its own peculiar culture, its norms and values. Whether
this culture, these norms and values are good or bad, how far they
and the many conflicts between one norm of conduct and another,
between one value and others can be regarded as generating criminal
behaviour, or at least contributing to it — all such questions are likely
to be answered in different ways by different observers. We have
already pointed out in Chapter 3, 11(b), that it is not the business of
the criminologist as such to pronounce value judgments and that
this rule should be observed especially with regard to ‘findings which
seem to lay bare the criminogenic effect of certain more general
aspects of our culture’.

We have now reached the stage in our discussion where those
previous remarks are of immediate practical significance. We should
not allow our personal views and prejudices on the great moral,
political, cultural, social and economic issues of our time unduly to
colour our interpretation of the socio-criminological scene; and as

419

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

far as it is humanly impossible to prevent the intrusion of those views
and prejudices they should at least be made clear to the reader ; more-
over, a moralizing attitude should be avoided even where the temp-
tation is strong to disapprove of certain features of our society. It is
our task to explain rather than to accuse. This is a platitude, but it
needs saying more than once. Sweeping generalizations based on
limited factual material are likewise a mistake, and, finally, no con-
cepts should be used which have not been clearly defined or, where
no such clear definition can be given, the reasons should at least be
indicated.

(a) Crime is only one, and certainly not the most important of the
many problems confronting a particular society, and it can be under-
stood only against its whole cultural background. What do we mean
by ‘ culture ’ ? Philosophers, cultural anthropologists, sociologists,
and many others, including some criminologists, have tried to define
it, the philosophers mostly in general terms, the others in more con-
crete ways, either by working out the characteristics of a specific, for
example American, culture or by comparing the different features of
primitive and more advanced, or of aristocratic, bourgeois and work-
ing-class cultures. In recent years special attention has been paid to
the evil effects of an inferior type of mass-culture and of the delin-
quent subculture. With the exception of these two phenomena, which
have been subject to strong criticism and will be discussed later on,
definitions of culture in general tend to be framed in objective,
neutral terms, i.e. accepting its existence as a social fact without ex-
pressing any criticisms of the good or bad qualities of a specific
culture. This applies especially to the anthropologists who have given
so much thought to, and collected so much material on, the ‘diffusion
of culture’, i.e. the ‘transference of culture traits from one area to
another, or from one part of culture to another part’, 2 and for this
reason this objective interpretation is sometimes called the anthro-
pological view of culture. It is only natural that those who are
familiar with several, possibly very different, cultures should find it
easier to adopt such a neutral attitude than those whose knowledge is
limited to one. Raymond Williams, in his Culture and Society 1780-
1950 , 3 traces the development of the idea of culture over the whole
period under discussion with special emphasis on the many changes
which this idea has undergone as ‘a record of a number of important
and continuing reactions to the changes in our social, economic and
political life’. Particularly popular and widely adopted is the defini-
tion of Primitive Culture by E. B. Tylor, as ‘that complex whole
which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom and any
other capabilities acquired by man as a member of society’, or,
shorter, as ‘the mode of life created by man’ (Gittler). In certain

420

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY I

countries and at certain periods this mode of life is comparatively stag-
nant, in other areas and at other times it is subject to rapid changes.

One of the most stimulating, but also most controversial discussions of
the subject of culture is T. S. Eliot’s book Notes towards the Definition of
Cultured It has often been criticized as merely pretending to be objective
and detached, be doing nothing more than ‘define’, while in fact being
reactionary and subjective, prejudiced in favour of an aristocratic, con-
servative, and religious view of society. 6 While this bias is certainly clear
enough for everybody to see, some of Eliot’s observations, though un-
palatable to many readers, are nevertheless profoundly true. He was per-
haps deceiving himself, however, in thinking that a writer with his strongly
felt convictions on the subject could honestly limit himself to mere ‘defini-
tions’. As it is, the reader constantly finds himself sitting between two
stools. There is on the one hand Eliot’s well-known catalogue of all those
‘characteristic activities and interests of a people’ which, he maintains, are
embraced by the term culture: ‘Derby Day, Henley Regatta, Cowes, the
twelfth of August, a cup final, the dog races, the pin table, the dartboard,
Wensleydale cheese, boiled cabbage cut into sections, beetroot in vinegar,
nineteenth century Gothic churches and the music of Elgar. The reader can
make his own list’ (p. 31). While this is presented as an objective, ‘anthropo-
logical’, statement of facts— -actually it is of course bitingly sarcastic— the
book as a whole contains an abundance of strongly felt value-judgments.
Another of Eliot’s recent critics, Richard Wollheim, whose able pamphlet
‘Socialism and Culture’ 6 we shall have to consider again below in Chapter
22, attacks mainly Eliot’s contention that culture is essentially a minority
phenomenon. Wollheim, too, uses a non-anthropological, subjective inter-
pretation of culture, arguing, probably too optimistically, that mass culture
possessescertainelements which raise it ‘above the level of a mere anthropo-
logical phenomenon: in coherence, that is, though not, of course, neces-
sarily in quality’ (p. 8). His main problems: ‘What is wrong’ with mass
culture, with middle-class culture, with the structure of culture in general?
are quite clearly problems of evaluation.

The culture of a society moulds, to a large extent, the personality
of its individual members as far as personality is the product of
childhood experiences more or less common to most of them. How-
ever, even within the same culture, unless it is a very, primitive one —
there exist many profound differences and shades, giving rise to the
formation of various subcultures. These, coupled with physical and
mental differences existing between individual members, lead to the
innumerable variations in human personality observable within the
same culture. 7

It has been the main object of this discourse to illustrate the
scintillating and well-nigh indefinable meaning of the word ‘culture’
with its inevitable repercussions in the field of criminal sociology.
Crime is rightly regarded as one of the manifold ways in which the

421

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

culture of an age and a nation expresses itself. If, however, the con-
cept of culture itself remains so vague and ill-defined there is a
danger that the light it can shed on crime may not always be as clear
as we might wish, but this warning should not provide an excuse for
those who would rather shirk the many hazards involved in facing
the sociological problems of crime.

The interdependence between the culture of a society and its
crime has been the principal tenet of the sociological school of crim-
inology for approximately a century and a quarter, and it is rather
surprising to read in Taft’s otherwise excellent chapter on ‘Law
Making and Law Breaking in the American Setting’ the statement:
‘The fact that crime and its treatment are rooted in the general culture
seems to have been somewhat neglected.’ 8 Already in his Physique
sociale of 1835 Adolphe Quetelet had coined the famous phrase that
society ‘contains in itself the germs of all future crimes’. 9 Together
with A. Lacassagne’s equally famous dictum of 1885: ‘The social
milieu is the culture-medium of criminality (le milieu est le bouillon de
culture de la criminalite); the microbe is the criminal element which
has no importance until the day when it finds the culture which sets it
multiplying . . . Societies have the criminals they deserve ’ — that phrase
has become the leitmotiv of criminal sociology. In accordance with
our insistence that unnecessary moralizing should be avoided we
would instead of Lacassagne’s strongly loaded term ‘deserve’ rather
use the more neutral formula: every society possesses the type of
crime and of criminals which fits into its cultural, moral, social,
religious and economic conditions.

The history of crime, as distinct from the history of the criminal
law and that of punishment, has been comparatively neglected,
especially in its earlier stages and outside the field of the so-called
primitive societies where much work has been done by social anthro-
pologists. The historians of culture, such as Jacob Burckhardt in his
Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy , 10 or Gustav Freytag in Bilder
aus der deutschen Vergangenheit, G. M. Trevelyan in English Social
History or W. E. H. Lecky in Ins History of European Morals, have
taken the criminological aspects of their subject more or less in their
stride. Historical studies exclusively devoted to the history of crime
are few and far between. For England, Luke Owen Pike has done
excellent pioneer work in his History of Crime in England, 11 and so
has Henry Mayhew in his London Labour and the London Poor, 12 but
their techniques are probably not quite up to the requirements of
modern historical scholarship, and Mayhew was concerned with con-
temporary conditions in the Metropolitan area rather than with
historical developments in general. Pike was a lawyer, and his book
deals at the same time with the history of crime, of the criminal law,

422

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY I

and of penal methods. He assembled considerable masses of material
and treated them in a comprehensive manner against the background
of the social and economic conditions of the period. Characteristic of
this is the concluding remark of his Chapter 5 which leads up to the
year of the Black Death: ‘The object of the present chapter has been
attained if it shows with sufficient clearness what was the actual con-
dition of our forefathers in the year 1348, how insecure were their
lives and property, and how vast is the difference between them and
us in manners, in sentiments, and in knowledge.’

Germany, too, possesses two outstanding works on the history of
crime, the one, Ave-Lallement’s famous Das deutsche Gaunertum 13
preceding Pike by 15-20 years, the other, modern one, Gustav Rad-
bruch and Heinrich Gwinner’s masterly Geschichte des Verbrechens . l4
Ave-Lallement’s great work is nowadays usually quoted as of im-
portance only to students of criminal argot; in fact it is far more
comprehensive : the first part of its first volume deals with the history,
the second part with the literature of criminals, the second volume
with the contemporary position, and the remainder with the linguistic
aspects. It is worthy of note that the book begins with the following
sentence. ‘Crime is a secondary malady affecting the ailing body of
bourgeois society; it can be stamped out only by healing that body,
but the steadily growing materialistic tendency of our age makes the
prospects of achieving this object more and more doubtful’ (my
translation). This, it will be remembered, was written in the period
between the publication of Quetelet’s and Lacassagne’s similar dicta
and shortly before the appearance of Lombroso’s main work. Ave-
Lallement was strongly opposed to any attempts to proclaim the
existence of a specific physiognomy of the criminal, while on the other
hand stressing that there was no conceivable political movement, no
change in social conditions that did not give the criminal his chance
(I, 16). Criminality to him was a profession which recruited itself
from all classes of the population (I, 3). Referring to the strong
Hebrew element in criminal argot, this remarkable author calls it ‘a
sad monument of the inhuman persecution and humiliation of this
ancient people of , God’ (Part m, p. viii). 16

Radbruch and Gwinner’s book, though limited to the history of
crime in Germany, is of general interest, too, because of its wealth of
references to cultural trends of universal significance. ‘It is the task of
historical criminology to compare the criminological physiognomy
of different cultural periods and to show how the atmosphere and the
conditions of the time influence its criminality, thereby making us
aware of the fact that the criminality of our age is also dependent on
its historical setting’ (p. 6, translated by the present writer). Of particu-
lar interest in this connection are the occasional attempts made by

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

Radbruch-Gwinner to compare, for example, the German criminality
of the time of the Reformation with that of the Italian Renaissance as
depicted by Burckhardt (pp. 101 and 123).

In addition to such comprehensive publications covering the de-
velopments of criminality in a certain country over many centuries
there are also several less ambitious, but more specific, studies
focused on limited periods of time, especially on the two world
wars and their aftermath, and in a few cases even here restricted to
certain forms of criminality.

The following may here be mentioned:

Franz Exner, Krieg unci Kriminalitat in Qsterreich, Vienna, 1927; Moritz
Liepmann, Krieg und Kriminalitat in Deutschland, Stuttgart and New
Haven, Conn., 1930; Hermann Mannheim, Social Aspects of Crime in
England between the Wars, London, 1940; also, War and Crime, London,
1941; also, Three Contributions to the History of Crime in the Second
World War and after, in Group Problems in Crime and Punishment, London,
1955, Chapter 5 ; International Penal and Penitentiary Commission, ‘The
Effect of the War on Criminality’, Recueil de Documents en mature penale
et pdnitentiaire, Vol. 15, Nov. 1951; Marshall B. Clinard, The Black
Market, New York, 1952; Estes Kefauver, Crime in America, London, 1952.

Jerome Hall’s Theft, Law and Society, 2nd. ed., Indianapolis, 1952,
although primarily a study in legal history, is also an important contribu-
tion to the history of crime in medieval England through its detailed
analysis of the famous Carrier’s Case of 1473, one of the milestones in the
development of the English law of theft, in its political, economic and
social setting.

( b ) In most human societies there is in operation a system of norms
and -values as the focal point of their respective cultures. It is one of
the main tasks of a culture to provide such norms and values, related
to which there are certain human attitudes towards them and towards
other people and to social institutions, etc. The definitions of these
three basic terms differ, unfortunately, from one writer to another not
less than the definition of culture. Value, for example, has been de-
fined in the following way: ‘those individual personal qualities which
are considered to be desirable in a given culture’, such as bravery,
strength, perseverance, self-control, aggressiveness; 10 or as ‘a con-
ception of the essential rightness or wrongness of a certain kind of
activity or of the desirability of a certain kind of goal, held in com-
mon by members of a social group . . . values . . . represent the
association of an emotion (of approval, respect, aversion) to an idea
or conception.’ 17 To another writer, values are ‘general standards’,
but elsewhere he states that ‘a beefsteak is a value’. 18 Similarly,
Murphy and Newcomb refer to a value as an object, but also as ‘a
statement of preparation for a response’. 10 These obvious contra-

424

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY I

dictions reflect a general inconsistency and woolliness of thought
which has already been exposed by Myrdal. The term “value” has,
in its prevalent usage, a loose meaning,’ he writes. ‘When tightened it
is generally taken to refer to the object of valuations rather than to
the valuations themselves,’ 20 i.e. to the beefsteak rather than to our
like or dislike of it. Myrdal, therefore, prefers to call the standards,
our ‘ideas about how it (i.e. reality) ought to be’, our valuations
(pp. 71 If.), and in the following we shall adopt this usage by calling
the beefsteak a value and our feelings about it a valuation.

This leads to the question of how values and valuations are related
to norms and which of them can claim priority. Bianchi, 21 reviewing
some of the philosophical literature on the subject, concludes that
‘The theory of criminology badly needs the priority of norms to
value.' Priority of value to norm, lie argues, ‘leads easily to the un-
scrupulous view that ends might justify means; the higher value justi-
fying the violation of lower values.’

In this connection, he also criticizes the view that ‘culture or society
are the sole providers of value’ (p. 134). To him, the norm is ‘The rule
of our action, determining what value must be strived after and what
phenomena pertain to positive or negative value. It is only the norm
that in case of conflict of values points out the value that has to be
realized’, and it makes no difference whether norms are ‘conceived to
lie in some eternal law’ or whether they are given by God. This view
is logically consistent with Bianchi’s conception of crime as identical
with sin and of a supernatural origin of norms. If, however, we
believe in the secular nature and origin of our norms we shall be
more inclined to regard them partly as creators of values and partly
created by them. Norms, whether moral, legal or social ones, deter-
mine behaviour and values, but actual behaviour and strongly felt
values may also crystallize into norms; in other words, there is a
constant give and take between them. ‘Conduct norms are the pro-
ducts of social life — A conduct norm is originally an ex post facto
rule. Generally speaking, “breach is the mother of law” and equally
a mother of conduct norms.’ 22

Another important concept to be mentioned in this brief termino-
logical note is that of attitudes ; they are of particular interest to
social psychologists, whereas sociologists tend to concentrate more
on an analysis of norms and values. Attitudes are formed by the indi-
vidual’s subjective awareness of certain basic norms and values of
his society or group; they are tendencies ‘to respond in a particular
fashion in given circumstances’; ‘they are learned and become habi-
tual or characteristic of the individual’. 23 Our use of the words ‘The
individual’s awareness’ is, however, not intended [to exclude the
possibility of attitudes common to whole groups— they are in fact the

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

more important ones — or of those which exist only in the unconscious
but find their expression in the behaviour of the individual or group.
Murphy, and Newcomb regard attitudes as being in most cases of a
verbal nature, as ‘verbalized or verbalizable tendencies, dispositions,
or adjustments toward certain acts’ (p. 889), and as they are mainly
concerned with the measurement of attitudes this is understandable,
but they admit that attitudes may also be inferred from other forms
of overt behaviour, for example, belonging to certain extremist
groups (p. 896). Research has often been done on the measurement
of attitudes, for example towards certain races and occasionally also
towards certain crimes to ascertain the views of individuals or groups
on the relative seriousness of various crimes (Murphy, p. 901).

The relationship between norms and values (or valuations), on the
one hand, and attitudes, on the other, may be defined as representing
two stages, the individual acquiring first certain valuations, for
example about the dignity and sacredness of human life, and secondly,
as a consequence of this, developing the corresponding attitudes
towards its preservation and protection against attacks ; or workers
acquire certain valuations regarding the respective value of their own
and their employers’ contributions to the common good in relation
to their respective rewards and, consequently, develop certain atti-
tudes towards work and the integrity of their firm’s property. Myrdal,
by using the term ‘attitude’ simply as a ‘convenient synonym for
valuation’ (p. 78), seems to oversimplify the relationship. .

Although attitudes are to some extent related to the whole person-
ality 24 and although the latter is characterized by a certain consistency,
attitudes can change and have occasionally been changed experi-
mentally. 25 However, Murphy and Newcomb, after surveying several
of these experiments, rightly express their dissatisfaction with the
outcome and their unreal character (pp. 971-2). Trasler maintains
that group values and standards change more slowly than individual
attitudes and that the task of the psychologist, who has to reconstruct
the latter long after the event, for example, the crime, is therefore
more difficult than that of the sociologist whose interest is focused on
more permanent group phenomena. 26

II. OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY

Having tried to clarify a few basic concepts, it is now our task to
examine the impact on present-day crime of the culture, the norms,
values, valuations and attitudes prevailing in our society. It is easy
enough to draw up a long list of the sins of commission and omission
within this society, of its follies and iniquities. Many of them will
have to be given their proper places in the chapters which are to

426

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

brought no decrease in the high rate of crime reached during the war: on
the contrary, crime has increased and is still increasing. The purpose of this
paper is first to give the facts about this situation, then to set out proposals
of the Government for dealing with some of its aspects. This Paper does
not seek to deal with those deep-seated causes which, even were they fully
understood, would be largely beyond the reach of Government action

(p. 1).

It is of course only too true that these ‘deep-seated causes’ are
largely beyond the reach of Government action, but even action on a
modest scale without an attempt to understand them can only make
confusion worse confounded. However, as matters stand, crimino-
logical research into these fundamentals is hardly to be expected under
Government guidance, and perhaps altogether incompatible with it.

What is disturbing is that the White Paper ‘looks forward to the
possibility of a fundamental re-examination of penal philosophy on
the basis of the knowledge to be gained in this way’ (p. iv, italics mine),
whereas it should be clear that nothing fundamental can be achieved
without that investigation of those deep-seated causes which the
Paper excludes from its deliberations.

It is only in line with this self-abdicating policy that so much
modern criminological writing in this country has, on the whole,
kept meticulously aloof from ‘dangerous thoughts’. It is encouraging,
however, that the more recent Home Office White Paper The War
against Crime in England and Wales 1959-1964 (H.M.S.O. 1964,
Cmnd. 2296) takes a less limited view.

Obviously, no original and comprehensive survey of the principal
causes of the malaise of present-day society can be expected within
the framework of a textbook on criminology, but a cursory glimpse
at them cannot be.avoided in anticipation of their more factual treat-
ment in subsequent chapters. To classify them according to their pre-
dominantly political, economic, social and cultural character might
be possible, but would at this stage be of little practical value
because of the large extent of overlapping. In the following we shall
as much as possible rely on the expressed views of widely accepted
and unsuspected experts rather than try to impose our own views on
the reader, and we can hardly do better than begin with a few extracts
from the remarkable ‘Postscript’ which Lord (now Viscount) Rad-
cliffe, a Lord of Appeal in Ordinary, in 1958 added to his Reith
Memorial Lectures of 195 1 30 and which reflect the thoughts of a
man of wide experience who is a conservative by temperament and
training without being a reactionary. There is in this country at
present, he writes, ‘no coherent public philosophy’, and ‘our present
phase of egalitarian sentiment varies between a self-righteous rejec-
tion of all distinctions of value between one person and another and

428

. OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY I

an indifferentism, amounting to boredom, which obliterates both the
distinction and the value’. With regard to the latter, it may become
necessary ‘to reassess the system of values which commends itself
to the “silent people” who “have not spoken yet”. Such an analysis
may yield some startling results’, and one of the most startling of
these results is that ‘we seem to be losing at an alarming rate the
power of independent judgment, the independent sense of value’.
Lord Radcliffe, who is primarily concerned in his book with ‘the
problem of power’, draws an interesting comparison between bloody
revolutions and the kind of bloodless, ‘legal, social revolution which
this country has undergone in the past decades. While the former are
normally brought to an end by the revolutionary leader himself and
while it can therefore be said that they carry within themselves their
‘own controlling mechanism’, this is not true of the bloodless revolu-
tion of our time which possesses no such leaders and no such con-
trolling mechanism of its own and may therefore not only last longer,
but may also produce a more complete break with the past. It can be
left open whether this contrast really applies to revolutions every-
where, but there seems to be some measure of truth in Lord Rad-
cliffe’s observation that the social revolution which has been trans-
forming this country in the past thirty years or so may eventually
equal those other revolutions in the profundity of its social import.
Faced with it, our leaders are helpless and powerless: ‘our governors,
though plainly conscious of the fact that we are going somewhere,
do not possess in themselves or convey to others any clear sense of
what it is that we are intended to reach.’ It is only too tempting to
take the easy way out: ‘the whole pressure of the democratic state is
in favour of giving them (the public) what they want.’ What do they
want? ‘It seems to be the fate of the member of contemporary society
that he should be invited to participate in everything and to ex-
perience nothing.’ When men are perpetually exposed to the impact
of mass-fabricated emotions at second hand by radio, television and
cinema, or — as Lord Radcliffe expresses it — ‘when the full range of
Pity and Terror can be travelled two or three nights a week, at stated
hours, in all the comfort of the home’, this must necessarily lead to a
flattening of these emotions, to indifference and boredom. The
greater the crowds of spectators at football matches and the louder
they shout, the larger the television audiences and the readerships of
popular magazines, the less do they care about the true values of
human life, about political issues as far as they do not involve their
own pockets and about moral or religious values, though occasional
lip-service may be paid to them. All this, and much more besides, has
been expressed by Lord Radcliffe in a few memorable phrases, of
which only a few more can here be quoted:

429

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

In the curious half-world of shadows which is created by the arts of
publicity, advertising, public relations, promotion and popular entertain-
ment in general, these (i.e, political) ideas, though more and more often
invoked, become more and more dim and blurred in meaning. The
majority of people do not want to understand them . . . What they must
not believe is that they will be saved by their institutions if they are not
saved by themselves . . . Constitutional forms and legal systems are very
well in their way, but they arc the costumes for the men who wear them.

And he concludes with the very unpopular observation that ‘It does
not matter at all that people should become more and more comfort-
able or that they should travel faster and faster, or that they should
visit more and more places,’ but he thinks it does matter that they
‘should not “sleep before evening” Contrasted with Lord Rad-
cliffe’s austerity, how much more pleasing is the politician’s assurance
that we have never had it so good, and his cheerful prophecy that
‘within the next twenty-five years the standard of living in this
country will be doubled’. Let us not misunderstand all this, however,
and it is all too easy to misinterpret Lord Radcliffe’s remarks. There
is no reason at all why we should not wish people to become more
comfortable and to travel faster and travel more, why life should not
become easier for ‘Mrs. Average’ {Britain, An Official Handbook,
H.M.S.O. 1961); what can be dangerous is only excess, lack of
moderation and of understanding of the meaning and purpose of
comfort and travel, and this is what we are observing in every sphere
at present. Television sets, washing machines and glamorous cars are
certainly not evil in themselves, but they become a very mixed
blessing if, as they do today, they completely crush all the higher
values in most people’s lives and minds and if one has to discover
marked negative correlation between the size of a car and the in-
telligence, maturity and sense of social responsibility of its possessor.
And to take up another of Lord Radcliffe’s points, it is all to the good
that travelling, including travel abroad, has become a mass pheno-
menon, but many of the present ‘package tours’ are planned for cheap
amusement rather than for any broadening of the mind through
contact with the cultural values of the countries visited. Great centres
of art are sometimes visited without giving the tourist the slightest
inkling of what he could see if he only knew and cared about their
treasures.

Another eminent public figure, Lord Shawcross, Attorney General
in the Labour Government of 1945, but now politically independent,
in a speech to the Royal Society of St. George in London criticized
the British people for ‘playing for safety, looking for salaried jobs
with pensions, shirking responsibility and trying to get more by
giving less and less’ ( The Times, 4.5.1962). He preferred to talk of

430

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY 1

‘blood, toil, tears and sweat’ rather than of ‘never having it so good’ .
To him, the outstandingly successful barrister, the idea of a salaried
job with a pension obviously did not appeal, but it is not certain
whether his harangue will cut much ice with people in the lower in-
come brackets exposed to the threats of sudden redundancy and un-
employment. Galbraith has rather severely criticized those who
cherish economic insecurity for others (p. 77), and Fyvel (p. 195) calls
‘this sort of moral lecturing pretty pointless’.

In the field of high international politics it can hardly be claimed that
recent developments in atomic testing or Governmental attitudes to
reactionary colonial powers and the like have been able to strengthen
the public sense of moral values and to guide the man in the street in
his attempts to distinguish between right and wrong.

The distorted sense of values has been deplored not only by
distinguished lawyers standing politically fairly to the right or at least
not too close to the left, but also by many others in responsible
positions, whether members of the Labour party or of unknown
political affiliations. To give only a few examples out of many, Mr.
Frank Allaun, Labour M.P. for Salford East, in a letter to The Times
(23.4.1962), and in the House of Commons, denounces the fact that
there are nearly five million households, i.e. approximately fifteen
million people, in this country without a bath of their own: ‘In an
age of automation, atomic energy and space travel, we cannot pro-
vide families with a bath in their house. This is a wrong sense of
values.’ While this fact, if it should be one, is universally deplored,
members of different parties differ, of course, fin their views on causes
and remedies concerning the absence and provision of these five
million baths. Or, another example: At the annual Conference of the
National Union of Teachers of 1962 the president disapproved of
what he called ‘the pursuit of novelty for its own sake’ and the
showing of photographs of the now invisible side of the moon in
schools which still possess ‘sanitary and heating systems that would
have been condemned years ago if the Factory Acts had been applied
to educational buildings . . .’ ‘Sanitation before space travel’ was his
slogan (The Times, 23.7.1962). A psychiatrist, writing to The Times at
approximately the same time (5.4.1962) about the incidence of mental
breakdowns in new towns such as Crawley, in Sussex, reveals the
existence of a strong sense of guilt ‘in a world where two thirds of the
population are below subsistence level and the richer third spend
their substance on better methods of atomic annihilation’. Such
international comparisons between the under- and over-nourished
sections of the world population easily lead to similar juxtapositions
of the pecuniary rewards offered to different groups of persons in this
country; The five-months dispute between the commercial television

431

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

companies and ‘Equity’, the Actors’ Trade Union, was happily
brought to an end in the same month of April, 1962, to which, as the
reader will have noticed, most of our quotations so far refer (any
other month of perhaps any other post-war year might have pro-
duced a similar collection of material). Under tins settlement, ‘for
pronouncing the words “Dinner is served, milady” a fee of twenty-
eight guineas will be offered if the show is flashed all over the country;
and if an actor’s contribution consists of more than ten words his
minimum payment will be thirty-six guineas’ {The Times , 4.4.1962).
The modest increases in the salaries of probation officers recom-
mended by the Morison Committee of 1962 were contrasted with the
attitude of a television actor portraying a probation officer who was
reported to have demanded a fee of £850 for an appearance instead of
the £450 so far paid ( Hansard , 10.5.1962, col. 670). Footballers are
‘sold’ for up to £150,000 by one club to another (the Observer,
13.5.1962), and the adulation freely afforded to them, to cricketers,
ballet dancers, film and television stars and the like makes our present
society look ridiculous, if not downright imbecile. During the Post
Office workers’ period of ‘working to rule’ in early 1962 it was
claimed that Football Pool coupons were receiving preferential treat-
ment. One can understand the feelings of a ‘civil servant’ who
writing to the New Statesman (6.4.1962), regards the pay of £1 9s. less
deductions, received by his daughter, a staff midwife at a local
hospital, for ten hours’ work delivering two babies, as unsatisfactory,
and we are indeed tempted to compare this with the fee now payable
to the members of ‘Equity’. Obviously, two live babies are worth far,
far less than four words on television, although the acquittal at the
Lidge thalidomide trial provoked the most indignant moral outcries
and protestations of the dignity and inviolability of human life (see
the daily and Sunday papers from 11th November 1962 onwards).
On the other hand, the workers of the Ford Company at Dagenham
and others were severely criticized for staging a one-hour strike in
sympathy with the nurses’ pay claim because this was endangering
production and therefore the wrong means towards a laudable end.

Some of these cases lead us straight to the heart of what are some
of the top problems of our present society, that of production and
that of the relationship between the public and the private sectors of
the economy. On both of them much light has recently been shed by
Galbraith’s widely quoted Affluent Society. As far as production is
concerned he courageously attacks the tendency prevalent in western
society to make a fetish of production regardless of the nature of the
goods produced, and thereby to ‘divorce economics from any judge-
ment on the goods with which it was concerned’ (p. 115). Whereas in
former days more production meant more food for the hungry, more

432

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY I

clothing for the cold, it now means satisfying the craving for more
luxury goods. ‘When man has satisfied his physical needs, then
psychologically grounded desires take over,’ which can never be fully
satisfied (p. 112). In this Galbraith followed Keynes’ distinction be-
tween needs which are absolute and those the satisfaction of which
only serves to make us ‘feel superior to our fellows’ (p. 118), just as
Keynes may have followed Durkheim (see Chapter 22, s.l). And as
many of the needs of the second category have only been artificially
created by those who produce such goods these needs cannot be used
to justify production. There is — as Galbraith admits — perhaps not
much that is novel in all this and in the emphasis on the peculiar role
played in the creation of such wants by modern advertising and
salesmanship (p. 121), but it is useful to have it so emphatically stated
by an economist of great authority. What he may not sufficiently take
into consideration is the position of a country such as Britain which
more than the United States depends on its exports of goods, whether
they may be essential or luxury goods. Moreover, and of this he is
only too well aware, the matter looks quite different from the point of
view of the worker who would lose his job if society would give up the
production of unnecessary goods. To satisfy his own essential needs
he may be dependent on such production, but does this necessarily
imply that he is entirely unconscious of its wasteful and parasitic
character? And, after all, a high proportion of these luxury goods
—among them those giant cars which Galbraith regards with parti-
cular disfavour — finds its way not into the export trade but into the
home market. Workers engaged in their production would be less than
human if their reaction to the bewildering abundance of mass produc-
tion would not also be one of bewilderment and ambivalence. While
their attitude may be one of admiration and gratitude for the chance
of full employment which it provides, it may be mixed with envy as
many of the goods produced are out of their reach and there may also
be the vague feeling that having to spend their lives producing what
is not really needed for the good of society is in fact misusing their
labour and skill for the wrong purpose. One of the many effects of
this feeling is their ever-increasing readiness to strike or to use
restrictive practices, although it is of course not the only cause.

The second criticism, so forcefully made by Galbraith, extravagant
spending on luxury goods in the private sector of the economy at the
expense of a half-starved public sector (pp. 104, 155 If.), is probably
not applicable in quite the same strength to conditions in Britain.
Private consumption is always justified, Galbraith complains, whereas
public spending is, at its best, a necessary evil. As every visitor to the
United States knows, this contrast between private opulence of a few
and public squalor as affecting the lives of the masses is far more
cm— c 433

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

striking over there than it is in post-war Britain, but nobody can
contend that it has here been completely eradicated. Fyvel (pp. 208-
210 and after) has already presented some evidence on this, and it
would be easy to add to it. ‘Expenditure by local authorities on wel-
fare services for the aged, the handicapped and the homeless . . .
recognized as one of the most under-staffed and impoverished ser-
vices in 1949, has risen at a slower rate than almost all categories of
private and public expenditure’, wrote Titmuss in 1960 (p. 2).

The incessant struggle between the public and the private sectors of
society for a larger share of the available wealth and power has
recently found a clear expression in the House of Lords’ debates on
commercial television and the influence of the ‘pressure groups’
working for its further expansion (9.5.1962). It was significant that the
passionate attack on the promoters of commercial television made by
Lord Reith, a former Minister and Director General of the B.B.C.
and often regarded as the father of British broadcasting, found the
strong support of The Times who wrote that ‘No amount of protesta-
tion about the evils of monopoly . . . can get round the facts of what
happened . . .it was not immorality that the opponents of commercial
television feared. It was the inanity that can now be heard and seen
for hours on end. The commercial programmes had . . . to make the
running, and the B.B.C. could not or did not ignore them. The loss to
true values is irreparable in the sense that for some years now a public
that would have taken happily to better fare has been fed largely on
chaff’ (11.5.1962). These are strong words, but perhaps not even
strong enough. It may only be added that, according to Lord Francis-
Williams in the same debate, commercial television advertising rev-
enue had risen from 42 million pounds in 1955 to 293 million in 1961.

After this had been written, the Report of the Pilkington Committee
on Broadcasting (H.M.S.O., Cmd. 1753, June 1962) was published
which condemns commercial television in the strongest terms, but is
much too lenientas far as the B.B.C. is concerned, large parts of whose
programmes are equally deplorable. It is symptomatic of this low
standard that The Times (14.11.1962) could ‘welcome’ the promised
extension of broadcasting hours with a leader headed ‘More and
More of Less and Less’. The Pilkington Report rightly criticizes the
well-worn excuse used by all the agencies of mass entertainment that
it is their duty ‘to give the public what it wants’ ; this phrase, ques-
tioned already by Lord Radcliffe, is, the Report says, ‘patronizing
and arrogant, in that it claims to know what the public is, but defines
it as no more than the mass audience ; and in that it claims to know
what it wants, but limits its choice to the average of experience’. Un-
fortunately, that excuse conforms to general Government practice.
All too often, Government spokesmenhave used that phrase to defend

434

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY I

the failure of the legislation to implement progressive proposals to
which they were opposed on grounds of party politics. 31

It can hardly be denied that the malaise of British post-war society
has been greatly mitigated by the growing impact of the Welfare
State with its increased spending on the social services. Together with
full employment and rising wages it has prevented at least some of the
most dangerous effects of our crisis in values. Taken as a whole, a
physically much healthier and far better nourished generation has
made its appearance as compared with its predecessors, a generation
also far better aware of the need for proper medical care and making
higher demands on it. 32 As mentioned earlier on, these improvements
have also been visible in the physical conditions of juvenile delin-
quents (Chapter 11, II, Note 19). On the other hand, the idea of the
Welfare State has been subjected to bitter attack as unduly favouring
the working classes at the expense of the others and as fostering the
lack of individual responsibility, the tendency to expect too much
from the State and encouraging a ‘wanting everything for nothing’
attitude. For such reasons it has often been suspected of leading to an
increase in crime and juvenile delinquency. A former Chief Metro-
politan Magistrate, Sir Laurence Dunne, for example is reported as
having said: ‘I put it down very largely to the Welfare State. That
removed a lot of responsibility from people. And wages have gone up
out of all recognition. In the vernacular, a very large section of the
population have tasted meat for the first time, and they want bigger
helpings. They have developed expensive tastes and they go to any
length to get the necessary money.’ 33 Some of these charges are
probably well-founded, although exact evidence is difficult to obtain.

Social services requiring an enormous administrative apparatus
can easily be abused and exploited by the less conscientious members
of the community, and, unavoidably, they lead to a weakening of the
individual citizen’s sense of responsibility for himself and his depen-
dants. Those whose business it is to prevent and discover abuses are
not throughout sufficiently well trained and alert to cope with the
problem. Speaking generally, however, it seems to be clear that the
Welfare State has produced vastly more good than evil. Moreover, as
Titmuss and his fellow-workers have shown, the widespread belief
that the Welfare State favours one-sidedly the working classes at the
expense of the others has little foundation in the facts if the concept of
the ‘social services’ is defined widely enough so as to include, for
example, taxation reliefs and many ‘fringe’ benefits which favour
mainly the middle classes. 31 As he points out, the terms ‘needs’ and
social services’ have a different meaning today from fifty years ago,
and in particular man’s ‘culturally determined dependencies’ have
grown in range and importance in accordance with Durkheim’s

435

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

observation that such dependency increases with the increasing in-
dividualization and specialization of labour. 35

The existing gaps in the services provided by the Welfare State have
been exposed by such writers as Audrey Harvey and Peter Townsend
who maintain that, while the British working classes as a whole have
become much more prosperous in the post-war period and it is very
difficult to assess the real extent of present-day ‘residual’ poverty the
latter seems to be far greater than generally assumed. 36 Of course,
those who belong to this minority of perhaps a few million people,
most of them ‘retired, sick, unemployed and widowed persons and
their dependants’ (Townsend), carry little weight politically, nor are
they likely to be of any direct criminological significance, but their
presence is a reminder that the Welfare State has not been able to
resolve all the economic and social problems of the community
which it serves — a reminder only too necessary in a society where, in
the words of the London correspondent of the Corriere della Sera, it
is ‘unfashionable to talk of poverty’ ( The Times, 12.4.1962). Nor has
the Welfare State so far succeeded in solving its psychological diffi-
culties and anxieties. Fyvel has called his book The Insecure Offenders,
implying that the feeling of insecurity is largely responsible for the
misconduct of teenagers — a point to be further discussed at a later
stage. Here we are concerned with the wider issues of how insecurity
and inequality affect the social and moral climate of society as a whole.

In an important speech delivered at a New York banquet of the
American Publishers’ Association, the then Prime Minister Mac-
millan seems to have dealt with some of these issues ( The Times,
27.4.1962). Referring to Disraeli’s Two Nations he said: ‘That has
gone. We are one nation now’: unemployment and poverty have
been obliterated, and ‘as a result, the class war, as we used to call it, is
dead or nearly dead’. Of course, ‘we have plenty of problems . . .
but at least they spring from buoyancy and not from stagnation’. Was
this perhaps a reply to Shanks’s book The Stagnant Society "l The
Times was not quite convinced by the Prime Minister’s statement: Is
the class war in Britain, for example, ‘dead or nearly dead’ ? Do all
our problems ‘spring from buoyancy not stagnation’ ? Let us consult
the experts. We have already found that they do not regard poverty
as having been completely obliterated in Britain, but it might perhaps
be added that according to Galbraith — whose remarks on this point
are borne out by our personal observations, however scanty — even
in the United States ‘poverty survives’, though no longer ‘as a uni-
versal or massive affliction’. 37 It survives if only because it is a relative
conception which constantly changes with the changing standard of
living of the people as a whole. If, as he states, in the mid-fifties one
American family in thirteen had a cash income of less than a thousand

436

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY I

dollars, this is poverty on a fairly substantial scale, but, as he rightly
observes, as the very poor are no longer in the majority they no
longer interest the politicians.

While Galbraith’s views on the American affluent society have so
far seemed to be, mutatis mutandis, applicable to Britain, too, there is
one point, a very important one, where this is not true: his often
repeated thesis that in modern western society the interest of the
masses in equality and security is fading away, being replaced by the
overriding interest in production (pp. 64 ff., 93, 244). His explanation
is, in part, the changing distribution of wealth and income in favour
of the poorer sections (p. 67). That considerable changes in the same
direction have occurred in this country, too, is a commonplace obser-
vation. For example, while in 1911-13, 1 per cent of the adult popula-
tion owned 70 per cent of the total capital, and in 1924-30 still 60
per cent, at present the figure is only 35 per cent. 38 But even so, the
distribution is still ‘fantastically unequal’, with 2-5 per cent of the
adult population owning 52-2 per cent, i.e. more than half of the total
(Brittan). To understand why this and the feeling of insecurity are
still burning issues in Britain one has only to turn to the recent book
of an economist whose political views seem to be moderate rather
than on the extreme left, Michael Shanks’s Stagnant Society. Ap-
parently he has had far fewer and less glamorous reviews here than
Galbraith, probably because criticism of the U.S.A. is more popular
and attractive in this country than self-criticism and many reviewers
may not have realized that some of Galbraith’s strictures are applic-
able outside the U.S.A. as well. Shanks’s main points, as far as they
are relevant in the present context, may be summarized as follows:
Contrary to what Prime Minister Macmillan said a year after the
book had been published, in the author’s view the class war does still
exist in Britain, ‘in cold, if not in hot form’ (pp. 59 ff.); there is an
almost complete lack of mutual understanding and confidence be-
tween the middle and the working classes, and many of the older
working-class communities still live in a world of ‘we’ and ‘they’. He
admits that modern Britain is no longer divided into ‘rigid mutually
exclusive social classes’, and that the class structure is rather a con-
tinuance where it is hard to tell where one class ends and the other
begins, but the old conflict in basic attitudes is still the same, with the
working classes looking at some basic economic and moral problems
in a wav entirelv different from that nf thp oi QCCPC

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

about a few shillings’ rise in his weekly wage packet. Nor has he, in
present circumstances, any incentive to work harder and to increase
production. On the contrary, the old fear of ‘working oneself out of a
job’ and the preference for overtime work are still very strong. While
there are certain signs that ‘the old working class is dying’ it takes a
very long time in doing so, and there may be a danger that its tradi-
tional attitudes may be carried over to the new society. A mixture of
old and newly acquired attitudes may exist within the same person,
which may be ‘either beneficent or explosive’ (p. 68). This particular
subject is taken up by the author in a later chapter (pp. 139 ff.),
where he tries to show that the new prosperity so evident in industrial
boom towns such as Coventry and Nottingham has produced neither
greater happiness nor more security. The contrary is true he thinks:
there is among these workers earning very high wages a strong sense
of guilt for two conflicting reasons: because they have it so much
better than their parents and because all this is too good to last —
feelings and apprehensions which are in part responsible for their
often excessive spending, much of it of course on the ‘never-never’.
Moreover, under the present system of unemployment benefit the
latter declines in proportion as wages rise, while on the other hand,
greater prosperity heightens the aspirations and makes sudden de-
privations even less tolerable. 30 All this justifies the paradox ‘the
higher the income the greater the insecurity’. Whether in the de-
pressed mining areas of pre-war Britain or in comparatively pros-
perous towns, twenty years of full employment have not been long
enough to wipe out the scars of the ‘hungry thirties’. All this con-
firms the view expressed by the present writer nearly a quarter of a
century ago 40 that ‘long-term unemployment may show its effect even
many years after being brought to an end, and it is capable of chang-
ing permanently the whole attitude of a family towards society.
Such a change may express itself in actions at a time when its external
cause has already disappeared.’

In times of recurring sudden and prolonged unemployment or
short-time work the effect may be disastrous as some of those boom
towns experienced a few years ago when work in the motor industry
became slack and there was a great deal of redundancy. In this con-
nection Shanks refers to the less insecure position of American
motor workers who now receive up to 60 per cent of their normal pay
for the first six months of unemployment. The lack of security which
hangs like a dark cloud over the British working population is high-
lighted by the changing fate of the miners and dockers who move un-
easily from a state of hectic over-employment to the opposite extreme
and back again without even fully comprehending the reason why.

With regard to the dockers, attention was drawn in my Social

438

Jack D. Douglas

17

tivities of any society, particularly one so complex and pluralistic as
ours. Such abstract meanings, especially as found in the language and
a few crucial areas of experience, such as the procedural rules by
which the members of society agree on how they are going to reach
decisions, provide only the shared symbolic resources which the mem-
bers of society must draw upon in constructing working meanings for
any given situation. When the members face any new situation, or a
situation for which they do not have what they see as an adequate (or
adequately nonproblematic) working agreement on its meanings, they
must decide which of these symbolic resources are relevant to the pres-
ent concrete situation, and they must then purposefully construct an
agreement about the appropriate set of meanings for that situation. As
Schutz 20 and many others have argued before, we decide upon this
relevancy of symbolic resources and do our meaningful constructions
primarily in terms of typifications. We first attempt to construct a typi-
fication of the situation: What kind of situation are we facing?
What other situations is it like? What are the generic categories cover-
ing such situations? It is crucial to find the type(s) of situation faced
because it is only such typification which allows us to draw upon pre-
viously established working agreements for the purpose of construct-
ing our present working agreement. If we could not draw upon such
pre-established working agreements at all, we would potentially be
faced with an infinite amount of work in testing out the infinite
possibilities. It is, of course, not at all dear just how we do go about
deciding on these typifications, but it seems very likely that our typifica-
tions of moral experience are done primarily by a process of analogiz-
ing. In the case of legal decision making this is actually quite clear.
New types of legal decisions are arrived at by deciding first of all
which previous cases are most analogous to the present one. As
Vaughan and Sjoberg argue in Chapter 6, one can see this process of
analogizing at work in the attempts of the Israeli judges to decide
under what laws and precedents Eichmann should be tried. 21 There
is, of course, a necessary gap, a categorical gap, between such a pre-
vious definition of a situation and the newly constructed definition;
and the process of analog izin g does not really allow one to eliminate
this gap. As we should already expect, it allows only (imperfect)
bridging of the necessary gap. It does seem, however, to involve a
minimizing of the gap as well. A method of least differences seems to
be integral to this analogizing process: the smaller the differences of
the typifications ( or categorical definitions ) of the situations, the more
analogous and, thence, the more acceptable the newly constructed

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

a scholar forces him to stress the darker sides as well. Moreover, it is
doubtful — and the author himself shares this doubt (p. xi) — whether
his case material is really representative of the British working
population as a whole since it was obtained from prosperous and
expanding industries where rates of pay and earnings tended to be
above average (p. xi). Moreover, unskilled labourers numbered only
11 per cent of the sample, whereas there were 53-7 per cent semi-
skilled, 29-1 per cent skilled workers and 6 per cent supervisors in the
sample. One might perhaps say, therefore, that the book should
have been called ‘the Affluent Worker in an Affluent Society*. Even so,
Zweig concludes that, while the ‘Two Nations’ may be a thing of the
past in terms of economics, they are not so in terms of education and
culture. ‘One cannot help feeling deeply disturbed at the apparent
waste of human intelligence amongst manual workers’ (p. 95), but he
expresses the hope that the rise in cultural standards will come in due
course, with the significant proviso, however, that the worker ‘is
not deflected by vested interests into the marshlands of the candyfloss
world’. ‘The intensity of class consciousness and class sub-conscious-
ness seem to be on the decline’, he thinks (p. 135), but the latter
‘sometimes lingers in the dim recesses of man’s mind, primarily fed by
past unemployment, starvation wages, unfair treatment, class dis-
crimination, by a common struggle against injustice ... it often
comes to life when a man is confronted by some acts which forcibly
bring home his status to him.’ And ‘those conceptions which deny the
existence of a conflict between capital and labour are false to life. No
amount of sermons on the theme of social solidarity will do away
with the basic conflict between capital and labour. But the conflict is
also not the whole truth’ (p. 204), and the worker ‘wants little
things rather than big things. The class struggle interests him less and
less’ (p. 209).

The confidence of the workers in the honesty and reliability of the
business world is further undermined by the goings-on on the stock
market, by successful or unsuccessful take-over bids, by the all-too
conspicuous, apparently effortless, and socially undesirable accumu-
lation of vast fortunes in the hands of a very few individuals and
companies. While some of these transactions may be economically
sound, many of them have but little justification and do not contribute
to the common good. The growth of monopolies, regardless of the
interests of the industries concerned, continues practically unchecked
by the existing legislation which, different from its American counter-
part, 43 has proved to be entirely inadequate for the objects it is sup-
posed to achieve. ‘A basic philosophy of values’, writes Wolfgang
Friedmann (p. 285), ‘must underlie any legal approach to the problem
of excessive concentration of economic power and other restrictive

440

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY I

practices and situations.’ This basic philosophy of values does not
exist at present, and most observers when watching the battles of the
‘giants’, such as the recent one between I.C.I. and Courtaulds, 41 find
themselves in a position equally bewildering as that of Sir Norman
Angell’s little niece: on entering a cinema where ‘a thrilling drama
was half-way through, with one group of men belabouring another,
after a few moments of watching she asked her companion in tones of
agony: “Do tell me whether these men are the good men or the bad
men. I cannot go on any longer not knowing whether to be glad or
sorry”.’ 45 The difference is, however, that the bewildered members
of the public watching these events have nowise uncle to turn to. The
Government is hardly in a position to advise them, having themselves
‘no firm principles by which it is judging moves in the industrial
field’ ( The Times, 13.3.1962). It is not surprising, therefore, to read
that a large group of Conservative backbenchers, feeling that ‘the
party image has been damaged by the failure to act against mono-
polistic tendencies’, even in a case (concerning the Imperial Tobacco
Company) where the Monopolies Commission had decided that the
relationship under investigation was ‘not in the public interest 4 ,
opened ‘what promises to be a determined campaign to persuade the
Government to act against monopolies’ (the Political Correspondent
of The Times, 31.5.1962). To this and similar points which can be
only briefly referred to in this preliminary al fresco survey we shall
have to return at some greater detail in the subsequent chapters.

Take-over cases such as the Grunwald, Jasper Group and State
Building Society affair of 1959-60 or the I.C.I.-Courtaulds struggle
of 1961, or the disappearance of the News Chronicle in 1961 resulting
in the loss of employment for many clerical and manual workers;
sudden slumps on the American and European Stock Exchanges
such as the one of the 28th May 1962, which, as the booms of the
years before, seem to serve mainly to enrich a small group of pro-
fessional speculators, amply demonstrate to the great masses of the
population the weaknesses of the present economic and legal struc-
ture. Especially at a time when great efforts are made to spread the
idea of share ownership among circles previously untouched by it,
slumps for which no obvious reasons can be produced can easily
arouse the suspicion that the ‘share owning democracy’ is only an
additional device to concentrate the wealth of the nation even more
in the hands of a few; and it matters very little whether or not such
suspicions are justified or even reasonable— the essential fact is that
they exist and may well exist in the minds of men who are perhaps not
particularly well informed but not necessarily fools. Moreover, as
The Times complained (23.5.1962), the long-promised statute to
protect small investors against ‘fly-by-night’ firms has not yet seen the

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

light of day. Already in March 1960 several Conservative M.P.s,
supported by The Times, had introduced a Bill to ‘stop certain un-
scrupulous financial manipulators from trying to get money under
false pretences’, but the Government doubted ‘whether it was appro-
priate to deal with a subject of such complexity in a private member’s
Bill’, although ‘there was no doubt that a most valuable service had
been performed in focussing attention on the surprising fact that a
company which published no accounts should be free to solicit
deposits from the public’ (House of Commons debate, IB. 3. 1960,
The Times, 19.3.1960) ; but it was not before the 10th July 1963 that a
Tather narrow ‘Protection of Depositors Act’ was formally placed on
the Statute Book. How far the so-called Capital Gains Tax — some
writers dispute its right to this proud name — and any of the measures
which may be taken to implement the rather timid recommendations
of the Jenkins Committee on the reform of the Company Law (see
the Observer, 24.6.1962) will ensure greater fairness and honesty in
business matters remains to be seen and the same applies to the
measures of the present Government.

It is, however, not merely these anomalies in the economic field
that are undermining the confidence of the masses but, as writers such
as Shanks and Titmuss have shown, 46 the equally profound dis-
crepancies in status and opportunities between employers and em-
ployees, conspicuously present in matters small and large: from the
different hours of work (the earlier you have — with the emphasis on
the ‘have’ — to start work in the morning the lower is your status) to
the differences in dress, in the description of your pay, in the length
of your holidays, the notice of dismissal required and dozens of other
items. ‘Nobody deliberately planned it,’ writes Shanks, but it is
‘always there, invisible but all-pervasive’, the distinction between ‘we’
and ‘they’. Moreover, the increasing mechanization of modern in-
dustry leads to a down-grading of old manual skills and subsequent
loss of status which ‘can be a serious injury to the personality. It can
lead to less dependable behaviour. It is thus closely linked to what is
called a “sense of responsibility” ’ (Titmuss). Shanks (p. 167), who is
in no way concerned with the criminological aspects of the matter,
nevertheless has a reference here to ‘the able man whose ambitions
are frustrated through lack of opportunity’ and what he rightly
regards as one of the greatest dangers to society: ‘Such men are only
too apt to become embittered. In extreme cases they become master
criminals. In less extreme cases they will become political rebels and
extremists.’ From his personal experience he refers to a number of
‘highly militant and in some cases deliberately obstructionist shop
stewards’ who felt, he thinks rightly, that they could have done a
better job than their managers if they had been given the same

442

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY I

opportunities. He is objective enough to add that the cases where
men felt like that without justification were rather more frequent
and that there are men who would be rebels in any society. But, as
we have seen already before, ‘if men define a situation as real it is real
in its consequences’ (W. I. Thomas). We shall come back to the
subject in the next chapters; here we have only to point out that a
sociological-economic discussion such as that presented by Shanks
has, by way of an objective analysis of important aspects of our
society, led to much the same result as was reached in one of our
psychological chapters: the emphasis on the key position of the
‘feeling of injustice’.

Moreover, industrial sociologists and psychologists have shown in
a large number of recent studies that technological and managerial
changes have given rise to new forms of conflict between manage-
ment and labour. 47

In the non-criminological field the consequences are, among others,
a more or less complete absence of a feeling of loyalty towards their
employers on the part of the workers, constantly recurring unofficial
strikes, and shoddy workmanship damaging the reputation of in-
dustry at home and abroad.

To interpret this chapter or the following as a criticism of indi-
vidual persons or even groups of persons would mean a misunder-
standing of its objects which are solely concerned with the structure
of our contemporary society as such. There can be no indictment of
individuals where ‘all are guilty’. Value judgments are, of course,
present everywhere, but as pointed out before (Chapter 3) they are
made by the writer as a citizen, not as a criminologist, and no special
expert knowledge is claimed for them. Moreover, the picture pre-
sented is one-sided in placing the emphasis almost exclusively on the
darker side of our society; obviously, there are many brighter spots
as well, otherwise this society would no longer be able to function. As
it is not altogether affluent, so it is not throughout stagnant or
criminogenic either. It is in the nature of a criminological enquiry
that in its endeavour to explain crime it has to draw special attention
to those darker sides. In the valuable series of discussions presented
by the B.B.C. in summer 1962 under such headings as ‘What is wrong
with Britain’ and in some of the articles published in The Times at the
same time under the title ‘The Pulse of England : People in Need of a
New Outlook’ all these points were made once more in a concise
form by a number of responsible people, and some of the hostile
reactions which these publications received showed, with very few
exceptions, merely the truth of the charges made. 48 In our following
chapters we have to examine how far the picture is further darkened
by the class character of our society.

443

Chapter 20

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY II: SOCIAL CLASS
AND CLASS CONFLICT: THEIR CRIMINOLOGICAL

IMPLICATIONS

I. SOCIAL CLASS AND CLASS CONFLICT 1

In our previous chapter the problem of social class has been touched
upon mainly with reference to the relationship between worker and
employer in factories, but it has of course a much wider significance
and dominates the whole of British society and, perhaps to a lesser
degree, some other parts of the western world too. And as most
criminals are believed to belong to the lower social classes the subject
presents us with one of the most important issues of the sociology of
crime. In spite of the existence of an immense sociological literature
on class, basic questions such as the definition of class; the dividing
line between the various social classes; the extent, directions and
effect of social mobility which has taken place in the post-war years;
the forms of social conflict engendered by the existence of different
classes, and many others are still far from settled. They have been
studied by sociologists, social anthropologists, journalists, novelists
and playwrights alike. Criminologists have up to the last ten or fifteen
years lagged somewhat behind, but, mainly thanks to the work of
Edwin H. Sutherland and his school, they are beginning to make up
for past omissions. For us the basic problems are these: how far does
the pattern of crime depend on the class structure of society ? how far
do changes in this structure, therefore, lead to corresponding changes
in the pattern of crime ? and how far are class conflicts responsible for
crime? Before dealing with these criminological implications of the
problem we have to consider the attempts made by sociologists and
others to clarify the general issues. 2

1 . Historical Remarks and Definitions

Even today, a hundred years after the publication of the major works
of Karl Marx (1818-83), it seems impossible to discuss the meaning

444

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY II

of class and class conflict without referring to him. Such a reference
is unavoidable at least in order to show where his prophecies of
things to come have been refuted by subsequent developments. Marx
was wrong in thinking:

(a) that there could be only two classes in a capitalist society, the
exploiting capitalists and the exploited proletariat, the former grow-
ing ever richer and richer, the latter getting more and more miserable
and also more uniform in their misere, so that a violent explosion
would become inevitable and the victorious proletariat would finally
take over. 3 He underestimated the importance and force of the middle
classes which he thought would eventually be wiped out altogether;

(b) that this class struggle was entirely concerned with the question
of private property in the means of production;

(c) that the only way in which fundamental social changes could be
effected was by violent social revolution;

( d) that all conflicts were class conflicts and all social changes
could be explained in terms of class conflicts; and that there was a
predetermined course which every such conflict had to take. In other
words, he was wrong in his belief in the historical inevitability of a
specific form of class conflict, and in looking at society too narrowly
in terms of the specific capitalist society of his period.

Actually, there has occurred not a reduction but a proliferation of
social classes. In the first place, as a consequence of the invention of
joint-stock companies, of co-operative and state-managed enterprises
and the ‘managerial revolution’ with its separation of ownership and
control, the capitalists of Marx’s system have split at least into the
two classes of the owner-managers and the non-owning managers
with their new inter-group conflicts in which the working classes are
not involved — a development which has been called the ‘decompo-
sition of capital’. 4 Secondly, the working classes of today bear but
little resemblance to the unskilled and impoverished masses whom
Marx had in mind. There has been a steady and ever-growing ten-
dency for industrial workers to become semi-skilled and highly
skilled, with a corresponding decline in the proportion of unskilled
labourers. 5

This latter decline has been observed in the U.S.A. (from 30 per
cent of the total labour force in 1910 to 20 per cent in 1950) and in
Britain (from 16*5 per cent in 1931 to 12-5 per cent in 1951). Dahren-
dorf estimates that the clerical group of workers, which may have
numbered one out of twenty of the total at the time of Marx’s death, is
now one in five and in some industries even one in three. In any case,
white collar’ workers have multiplied by leaps and bounds, and the
very complex question arises how many of them actually belong to
the working and how many to the middle classes. Of course, to do

445

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

Marx justice, lie had also written: ‘the stratification of classes does
not appear in its pure form even here [i.e. in England]. Middle
and transitional stages obliterate even here all definite boundaries,
although much less in the rural districts than in the cities’ ( Capital ,
Vol. 3, quoted from Grant, op. cit., p. 23). But he did apparently not
expect the differences within the working class to become so great and
‘the uniting force so precarious’ (Dahrendorf, op cit., p. 51). And,
finally, the middle class: here the process of differentiation has gone
so far that most writers on the subject have to apologize for using this
term at all because it has lost so much of its original meaning.
Standing between the two other groups it has continuously been
losing members to and also gaining some from them. In short, to do
justice to the present, extremely diversified and frequently changing,
class system in western society one has to split those original two or
three classes into at least five or even nine. Danish sociologists use
the latter system by dividing each of the three original classes, the
upper, middle and lower, again into upper, middle and lower. 6 The
American writer Yance Packard 7 uses five classes: the real upper,
semi-upper, limited-success, working, and real lower class, but in
addition there are in his system the ‘horizontal’ and ‘vertical’ layers
which distinguish the minority groups such as Negroes, Jews, and
certain immigrant groups, from the rest.

The criteria most commonly employed in the definition of ‘class’
are wealth, education, occupation, speech and accent, 8 family back-
ground, housing and ‘address’, child rearing habits, 9 and level of
aspirations, interest in serious arts, literature, music and similar
cultural pursuits, but it is invariably stressed that neither of them is
necessarily decisive, and that there may be considerable national and
regional variations. Some of the criteria used in American studies,
for example, may have little meaning in other countries, and vice
versa, and even within country and region the emphasis changes
according to personal prejudices. ‘Of all the signs an Englishman
registers in socially “placing” his fellow man, speech remains the most
flagrantly decisive’, writes John Coleman, but this excludes of course
the foreigner whose accent places him outside the pale anyhow. Or
take matters of food: ‘If you eat salad for lunch or dinner you are
probably upper class. Raw tomatoes and carrots are the mark of a
high social class. But serve potatoes only with vegetables — and your
lower-class origins are showing’ ( New Statesman, 1.3.1963, quotation
from Daily Express in ‘This England’).

One might be tempted to say that all these criteria make sense only
against the background of a certain, almost indefinable, cultural
atmosphere, and that ‘class’ is nothing but an abbreviation to
describe a way of living, thinking and feeling. One can observe very

446

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY II

many families nowadays who, although middle-middle class in
matters of property, income, housing, a minimum of formal edu-
cation and so on, share, secretly at least, most working-class tastes
and have no interest whatsoever in ‘culture’. To them, their middle-
class aspirations are entirely limited to matters concerning their
material well-being.

In the U.S.A. much research has been done in recent years on the
concept of ‘deferred gratification’ which was introduced to describe
the phenomenon of ‘impulse-renunciation’ or ‘self-imposed post-
ponement of gratification or satisfaction’. 10 The object has been to
test the, by no means new, hypothesis that this phenomenon is a
typically middle-class pattern designed to facilitate upward social
mobility into the middle class or to maintain already existing middle-
class status. While this hypothesis has not invariably been confirmed
by the available statistical investigations of a local character, 11
general impressions seem to indicate that we have in fact to regard the
‘deferred gratification pattern’ as one of the elements peculiar to
middle-class and aspiring middle-class culture and closely linked to
the idea of upward social mobility (below, s. 2). In the Nottingham
University study of ‘Radby’ this has been well described as one of the
characteristics distinguishing the respectable working-class ‘Glad-
stone Road’ from the also working class but less respectable and more
delinquency-prone ‘Dyke Street’ people: ‘Dyke Street will give the
children anything they ask if possible because they had such a rough
childhood themselves. Gladstone Road sees a danger in this. It wants
long distance benefits rather than immediate pleasures for their
children. Their children have got to rise educationally and finan-
cially.’ 12 All this is nothing but a consequence of the splitting-up of
the working class into several sub-classes: what used to be one of the
dividing lines between working and middle class has now been trans-
ferred to a lower point on the continuum so as to form a barrier
between the various divisions of the working class. The picture is
similar to that found in recent American research (see Note 1 1).

Dahrendorf differs from most other writers in regarding the
criteria mentioned before as factors determining not class but
stratum (p. 76). To him, the most important characteristic of class is
authority and power: ‘the fundamental inequality of social structure,
and the lasting determinant of social conflict, is the inequality of
power and authority which inevitably accompanies social organiza-
tion . . . classes are social conflict groups the determinant of which
can be found in the participation in or exclusion from the exercise of
authority . . (pp. 64, 138, and passim).

Private property in the means of production, regarded as all im-
portant by Marx, is only one of many forms of authority (p. 136). In

447

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

his complete rejection of the economic factor as a criterion of class
Dahrendorf goes perhaps too far, although he concedes that there is
an ‘empirical tendency’ for authority to be, to some extent, accom-
panied by high income.

Each of the comprehensive factors involved in the extremely
complicated definition of class consists of innumerable smaller items,
all of them subject to more or less frequent changes with changing
fashions in the struggle to keep up with either the ‘Joneses’ or, in the
higher ranges of society, with the ‘Cecils and Cavendishes’. Large
cars and conspicuous television aerials are status symbols today;
tomorrow they may be replaced by more expensive houses and indoor
aerials because it will then be fashionable not to let people know that
you have ‘so degraded yourself as to admit to watching the telly’
(letter to The Times, 6.6.1960). For the great majority of working- and
lower middle-class families, however, the possession of a telly and a
big motor car are still among the most important status symbols, 13
with washing machines and telephones taking second or third rank.
In some cases, the ‘six seater’ assumes a status symbol of tragi-comic
intensity; if its claims can be legitimately met, well and good;
otherwise, the stage is set for the conflicts described in Chapter 22
below, and not only in the case of adolescents, but occasionally of
adults as well.

In a short, but closely argued article Goldthorpe and Lockwood 14
have recently challenged the view that ‘with the coming of the affluent
society the old conception of a distinctive working class is being fast
outmoded;, and that today many manual wage earners and their
families are becoming in most respects socially indistinguishable from
various other groups . . . generally regarded as middle class’. As they
point out, in spite of economic prosperity (which is only too often
not identical with economic stability and security), certain charac-
teristic patterns of middle-class social behaviour, which they call the
normative and relational aspects (i.e. values, perspectives and modes
of behaviour, on the one hand, and acceptance on equal terms by
middle-class people, on the other), are still absent even among many
higher working-class families. They conclude that, although there
may be a converging of the two classes, there is no swallowing up of
the one by the other.

There is an important difference of opinion as to whether ‘class’
can be defined by objective criteria at all or whether all we have to do
is to ask how individuals classify themselves. Naturally, the sub-
jective approach is preferred by psychologists such as Centers in
U.S.A. and Eysenck 15 in Britain, the latter using the term ‘social
class’ as measuring something entirely subjective, the term ‘status’ as
meaning something entirely objective. Dahrendorf (pp. 145 ff.) is

448

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY II

critical of the distinction objective-subjective, but the main points
of his criticism seem to be reducible to differences in emphasis. There
can be no doubt that subjective elements play an important role in the
definition of class, but it would be a mistake altogether to deny the
significance of objective elements. Before people can express any
views as to the particular class to which they think they belong they
must have an at least vague conception of the objective characteristics
of the various classes in existence. Even so, Zweig 16 was right in asking
the men in his sample how they placed themselves on the social scale,
and their answers were revealing as demonstrating, often uncon-
sciously, the great importance attached to class by the British work-
ing population. As mentioned above (Chapter 19) in Zweig’s view
the intensity of class-consciousness seemed to decline, but does not
the very fact that of 346 workers who were asked how they placed
themselves only 229 answered working class, whereas 54 thought they
were middle class, 17 were indefinite, and 46 refused to answer, in
itself prove the intensity of their feelings?

2. Social Mobility

(a) There are two socio-psychological mechanisms which greatly
affect the existing class system. Social mobility, i.e. the frequency,
facility and direction of the changing-over of individuals from one
social class to another, is one of them, imitation the other. Social
mobility has been studied in Britain mainly by D. V. Glass and
his associates. Without going into details it can be said that the
picture emerging from this study, carried out shortly after the
war, is, in Barbara Wootton’s words, ‘on the whole, discouraging
to the complacent equalitarian’ ; there is less upward mobility
than one might have expected, and downward mobility is far from
negligible. 17

Simey, quoting a slightly later study by Prais, confirms this result:
‘Though there is evidently a great deal of mobility in our society, and
it is wrong to regard the class structure as rigid, there is room for
much more than exists at the present time’ (p. 842). Matters may have
slightly improved in recent years. Zweig (pp. 139 ff.) found that of the
sons of the workers in his sample one quarter were reaching middle-
class level, but here again we have to bear in mind that his is not a
truly representative sample. Simey poses the question whether lack of
mobility creates conflict or whether, on the contrary, mobility itself
may be a cause of conflict, and he may be right in thinking that there
is something to be said for each of these opposing views (p. 840).
On the one hand, ‘class distinctions may be easier to tolerate if
it is obvious that there is no “damned merit” in them’, and if the

449

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

individual victim of such distinctions can persuade himself and others
that it is the rigidity of social barriers rather than his personal in-
adequacy that is to blame for his failure to climb the social ladder.
On the other hand, where social mobility does to some extent exist,
but the individual is through no fault of his own excluded from its
advantages, for example because his parents cannot, or do not want
to, provide the means for an extended education, he is likely to
become embittered, and, as Simey points out, the number of such
persons is substantial. Or the individual who has failed may blame
himself and become disheartened and stop trying altogether. 18 It
seems that absence and presence of social mobility are both capable
of creating psychological problems, but probably in different ways
and for different types of people. All we possess at present are ‘crude
hypotheses’ (Simey), but even so we shall have to return to them later
on (Chapter 22) as the matter is of crucial importance to the crimin-
ologist. American writers stress that in their society the era of limitless
opportunities has come to an end, that social mobility is now rela-
tively insignificant in the United States, that even the growing
availability of college education has proved a rather illusory blessing
to students from poor homes lacking the advantages of family
background and connections, without which education cannot secure
the expected success. 19

In this country, too, a few sociological studies have been published
after the war on the effect of educational reform on social mobility,
the most recent of them being by Jean Floud, A. H. Halsey, and F. M.
Martin, Social Class and Educational Opportunity , 20 and Brian Jack-
son and Dennis Marsden, Education and the Working Class. 21 The
latter in particular is of considerable interest to the student of social
mobility because it takes up in greater detail one of the subjects of
Richard Hoggart’s The Uses of Literacy, i.e. the fate of the scholar-
ship boy. 22 Like Hoggart, these two authors came themselves from
the working classes in the North of England, had worked their way
through grammar school and university and possessed, therefore,
some personal experience and understanding of the human and social
problems they were examining. They are grateful for the chances of a
higher education given them by the Welfare State ; had they been born
fifty years earlier they would probably have spent their lives as
weavers in northern mills (p. 13), but they are naturally anxious to see
the picture as a whole instead of resting on their own personal
laurels.

The place of their research was ‘Marburton’, a prosperous indus-
trial city of medium size in the North where they had spent their
youth, with a working-class population (skilled, semi-skilled and un-
skilled) of 78 per cent against an average of 74 per cent for Great

450

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY II

Britain, with (at the time) little unemployment and a slightly over-
average successful educational system. Thanks to the Education Act
of 1944 and the abolition of school fees, here as elsewhere the number
of working-class children going to grammar school had increased,
but even so in the period 1949-52, which was taken as an example,
only 36 per cent of its pupils who passed had working-class fathers,
whereas 64 per cent were of middle-class origin (p. II). 23 Moreover,
the impressions of the authors confirmed the statement of the Crow-
ther Report of 1959 24 that nearly one half of the young men with an
I.Q. of over 120 left school at the age of 16 and that for those with an
I.Q. between 108 and 120 the figure was 87 per cent; that those who
left without taking the full course were predominantly working class
and that this wastage of talent was largely a class wastage (pp. 13 and
210), In other words, ‘very many able working-class children either
do not reach grammar school at all, or they leave without taking the
full course’. The same conclusion was reached by Jean Floud and her
co-authors. Not satisfied with these statistical findings, Jackson and
Marsden interviewed ten middle-class and eighty-eight working-class
children and their parents to discover why so many more middle-
class children were able successfully to complete their grammar
school course ; and what kind of difficulties the working-class children,
whether successful or not, encountered; what were the outstanding
characteristics of those who succeeded and of those who did not; and
what was the effect of higher education on the successful ones. Only a
few of their findings and impressions can here be mentioned. A high
proportion, more than one-third, of the successful working-class
children came from what the authors call ‘sunken middle-class’
families, i.e. those who had originally been middle class and had
come down in the world, but tried ‘to re-invest their energies in the
education of their children’ (pp. 54-5). This means a further reduction
in the numbers of successful working-class children, most of whom,
by the way, came from small families.

Among them, there were some who, at the bottom of their hearts,
refused to ‘accept’ the grammar school with all the conflicts it pro-
duced between their previous ways of living and thinking and those of
their families, on the one hand, and the middle-class values of the
grammar school on the other. However, more important than this
comparatively small group were those, in the authors’ view, very large
numbers of gifted working-class children who left the school pre-
maturely because of such conflicts. ‘The rebels left’ (p. 103). Even for
those who conformed and stayed on, ‘the picture of social mobility
was not as easy and triumphant as all that, when examined closely’
(p. 158). Many found themselves socially and psychologically sitting
between two stools or rather two classes and belonging to neither of

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

them; only 58 per cent of them considered themselves as middle class
when interviewed later in life, and over half of the parents thought
their children were still working class (pp. 171-2). From this the
authors conclude that * “class” could be something in the blood, in
the very fibre of a man or woman . . . not something to be shuffled off
with new possessions, new prospects, new surroundings . . How-
ever, this feeling of loyalty to their class of origin was not often found,
and the authors stress that for very many of the successful ones ‘the
most vital connections between the child and his working-class home
were atrophied or severed’ (p. 173), but they were also aware that
some of these psychological difficulties may arise in the case of non-
working-class families, too (p. 186).

In short, Jackson and Marsden’s excellent study shows that ‘the
crudest economic barriers [to higher education] have been removed,
only to reveal subtler ones at work. It is now clearer to see the many
small ways in which money and power in society prepare early for a
competitive situation’ (p. 210). Their book has provoked a great deal
of both applause and criticism. Critics have been quick to point out,
for example, that the psychological and social problems which
working-class grammar school children have to face are negligible as
compared with the frustration suffered by those gifted children who
because of their origin fail to obtain a better education. Headmasters
have also claimed that in view of the rapidly changing social climate
of our time the picture painted by the authors, based upon early post-
war conditions, is already getting out-of-date. 25 While it is difficult to
accept the latter claim, it is certainly true that the fate of the few
grammar school successes, interesting as it is, should not be allowed
to obscure the more tragic and from the point of view of society more
important situation of those, apparently far more numerous, failures. >
They provide a fertile recruiting ground for the army of able men
to whom Shanks refers as ‘one of the greatest dangers to society’
(p. 167; see Chapter 19, text to Note 39) and representing one of the
most obvious illustrations of sociologically explainable frustration
(see Chapter 22 below).

In the present chapter we are, of course, concerned with education
only as far as it affects social mobility; its more specifically crimino-
logical aspects will be treated in Chapter 24.

At this stage it might be apposite to refer again to Dahrendorf’s
theory of class and class conflict and his insistence that the recent
improvements in the economic position of the masses in western
society do not touch the problems of class conflict, because the
essence of the latter lies in the distribution of authority rather than of
wealth. ‘Even if every worker owns a car, a house and whatever other
comforts of civilization there are, the root of industrial class conflict

452

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY II

is not only not eliminated, but hardly touched’ (pp. 64 and 254).
Although modem society has been able to ‘institutionalize class
conflict’, i.e. to develop a number of institutional devices such as
collective bargaining and organs of conciliation and arbitration
designed to eliminate conflict, ‘they may, indeed, actually increase the
violence of conflict by redirecting it’ (p. 66). Dahrendorf is, therefore,
critical of those writers who, like Mayo and Drucker, believe that
class conflict will be eliminated by proper organization (p. 109 ff.).
To him, ‘societies create out of their structure with predictable cer-
tainty the conditions of social antagonism . . .therefore society is . . .
at best a relatively integrated system of conflicting structural forces’,
and ‘conflict is an essential element of the structure of every society’
. . . ‘Psychological factors are a secondary characteristic, not the
cause of social conflict.’ What distinguishes this theory from that of
Marx is that for Dahrendorf class conflict does not mean an ‘inevitable
process of intensification leading up to a revolutionary explosion’,
and there is no ‘predetermined course of class conflict’ (pp. 132-3).
While we can agree with most of these statements, there seems to be
insufficient evidence as yet for the claim that institutionalization may
actually increase the violence of class conflict, and the author himself
admits at a later stage (p. 277) that the violence and intensity of
industrial conflict have actually declined. Moreover, the power of the
psychological forces involved seems to be somewhat underrated by
Dahrendorf. With regard to strikes, for example, the present writer
tried to show in an earlier book 28 how much their conduct depends on
national and individual characteristics. Another point where we
differ from Dahrendorf is his view that the lowest strata of society,
MavCsLumpenproletariat, are excluded from conflict group formation
because they are largely recruited in ‘structurally irrelevant ways’, for
example by delinquency (p. 187).

3. Imitation and Rebellion 27

The significance of imitation, formerly often overrated, has been
somewhat neglected by modern academic writers. One of its strongest
nineteenth-century protagonists, Gabriel Tarde (1843-1 904), 28 is
nowadays usually ignored by psychologists, sociologists and crimino-
logists alike. The reasons are not far to seek. For all his wealth of
fruitful ideas, Tarde was perhaps, as Miller and Dollard point out
(p. 246), ‘not actually very important as a theorist in regard to the
imitative mechanism. He was quite properly willing to leave this
problem to the social psychologists.’ Moreover, he was inclined to
oversimplify the issue and to use it in too broad a sense so as ‘to
explain everything (which was decidedly over-working' the trick)’. 29

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

He formulated three ‘laws of imitation’ : first, men imitate others in
proportion to the closeness of their contacts and, therefore, they do
so more in cities and other places where crowds assemble than else-
where. Secondly, the social trend of imitation goes from the lower to
the higher social classes, i.e. the former tend to imitate the latter.
Thirdly, where there is a clash between two opposing fashions one
can become the substitute for the other. We are here mainly inter-
ested in the second of these ‘laws’, all of which are of course nothing
but mere trends.

The work of modern theorists has mainly consisted in certain
refinements of that general idea of imitation, based upon observations
of animal and child behaviour. Social psychologists have made use of
imitation as one of the starting points for their theory of learning as
opposed to the previous tendency to regard it as an instinctive, non-
learned process. They distinguish between the various forms of
behaviour which had formerly been indiscriminately called imitation,
such as ‘a kind of conditioned reflex imitation’, on the one hand, and
the ‘conscious and deliberate copying of the behaviour of another’
(Allport, p. 155); or between ‘matched-dependent behaviour’, where
the imitator ‘does not need to be keenly aware that his act is matched’,
and deliberate copying (Miller and Dollard, p. 9). The Freudians 30
place the main emphasis on the idea of identification as the basis of
imitation; to them identification rather than mere imitation becomes
one of the principal factors in the formation of the super-ego, but as
Mowrer writes (p. 590), the exact nature of the relationship between
identification and imitation is not quite clear. While the work of
leading theorists and psycho-analysts has thus led to greater discern-
ment and sophistication in our views on imitation (in its widest sense),
it has so far remained on too abstract a level to be of much practical
use to the solution of criminological problems.

While the present chapter is focused on the subjects of social class
and mobility it should be made clear that the processes of imitation
are operative not only in this field but in various others as well.
Miller and Dollard, for example (Chapter 12), distinguish four classes
of persons who are imitated by others, and ‘superiors in a hierarchy
of social status’ form only one of these classes ; ‘superiors in an age-
grade hierarchy’ form another, very important, one.

In the present context, attention has to be drawn to the fact that
there are important differences between imitation and social mobility,
although they are both concerned with the relationship between the
various social classes. Those who are successful in the process of up-
ward mobility desert their original class and acquire membership in
another. As we have seen in connection with the study of educational
mobility such a desertion may in some cases not be complete, and the

454

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY II

individual may be left sitting between two stools, but even so it
amounts to a real transfer from one class to another. Mere imitation
can never have this far-reaching effect ; it remains more on the surface,
and the individual who imitates certain aspects of the behaviour of
members of a superior class hardly ever leaves his own, although
imitation may occasionally act as a preparatory stage to upward
mobility. ‘Copying from below upward is likely to be fragmentary
and transitory’ (Miller-Dollard, p. 159). One might conclude, there-
fore, that while there are examples of completely successful social
mobility, there can never be equally complete cases of mere imitation,
and for this reason imitation, too, creates its own sources of discon-
tent and frustration.

In his two books The Hidden Persuaders and 27 le Status Seekers
Vance Packard has given an abundance of illustrations of how the
process of imitating higher social classes works in the U.S.A.,
although efficient persuaders operate, of course, through other pro-
cesses as well such as ‘image building’, ‘symbol selling’, etc. It has also
been discovered by market researchers that in certain situations and
with certain types of people imitation may not work, and advertisers
have occasionally run into trouble by too easily assuming that lower-
class people would simply copy what, they were told, were the tastes
of classes above them. Sometimes people want to be able to ‘identify’
themselves rather than to imitate, and where they find such identi-
fication impossible or where they fear to be humiliated by attempting
to imitate they may altogether refuse to play the advertiser’s game. 31
More often, however, copying the behaviour and fashions of other
people such as film stars believed to belong to a higher social level
tends to become exaggerated and farcical.

The extreme opposite of the imitator is the rebel; he is interested in
the behaviour of other individuals or classes mainly because he is
determined to behave and act in a different way to demonstrate bis
opposition and to exhibit his class consciousness or simply his
‘otherness’. In Freudian terms this uncompromising and lasting
opposition to authority is easily explainable by reference to an un-
resolved Oedipus complex. Mowrer describes such rebels as indi-
viduals whose ‘inner personality structure remains relatively little
differentiated, whose ego is almost indistinguishable from the id and
whose total energies are directed towards attacking, exploiting and
resisting the social order . . (Mowrer, p. 523). He admits that this
is an oversimplification which does not do full justice to the com-
plexities of criminal psychology. However, examples of this type are
well-known in criminological literature, although it may be difficult,
if not impossible, to decide in individual cases whether the psycho-
logical origins of the rebellion go back to an unresolved Oedipus

455

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

complex or to later experiences, possibly outside the family, creating
an overwhelming sense of injustice (see also Chapter 16, V, and
Chapter 17, ‘political crimes’). If we can accept as true the interesting
self-analysis of ‘Robert Allerton’, 32 his early differences with his
father were not due to any lack of sympathy for, and antagonism to,
the latter but rather to a fundamental, and rather impersonal, con-
flict of two opposing social philosophies: while the father, notwith-
standing all his bitter disappointments, pinned his faith in evolution
and a gradual improvement of the social system, the son preferred to
better himself by a highly personal form of revolution, i.e. crime: ‘I
believed the system was wrong, but I knew it wouldn’t ever be
changed by our sort. I didn’t want to wait two hundred years for the
day when everyone had fair shares’ (p. 21). His fundamental attitude
towards society was one of mistrust and suspicion (p. 112). To him,
rebelliousness was ‘almost like a natural instinct’ (p. 72); so he
became what his interviewer and co-author calls ‘a well-integrated
personality’ (p. 13), but the careful reader of this challenging book
may well doubt whether it is already the last word in the evolution of
this, possibly not so well integrated, rebel.

One of the profoundest discussions of the problem of the rebel is
that presented in Camus’s V Homme revolts.™ He uses the concept in
a far more comprehensive sense than has here been done and ap-
proaches it from the metaphysical and philosophical, from the
historical, religious and literary angles. Even so, one of the focal
points of his book is the comparison between the rebel and the
criminal, in particular the murderer, but his concept of crime is as
vague as that of rebellion. Logically, he concludes (pp. 245 ff-),
murder and rebellion are contradictory because rebellion, as he sees
it, is a constructive force; when it ‘emerges into destruction’ it is
illogical. ‘Its most profound logic is not the logic of destruction; it is
the logic of creation . . . the logic of the rebel is to want to serve
justice so as not to add to the injustice of the human condition.’ He
has to do evil, but he has to do it despite himself. Is Camus’s rebel a
rebel against the injustice of class distinctions? Occasionally, it seems
so, as for example when he writes: ‘The spirit of revolt can only exist
in a society where a theoretical equality conceals great factual in-
equalities’ (p. 26), which seems to express ideas very similar to those
of Merton (see below, Chapter 22).

Far less ambiguous than that of Camus is Merton’s socio-psycho-'
logical interpretation of the rebel. He treats rebellion as one of his five
modes of individual adaptation, the other being conformity, inno-
vation, ritualism and retreatism (see also Chapter 22). Its distin-
guishing feature is that it combines the rejection of the prevailing
values of society with the desire to substitute new values for the old

456

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY II

ones. Ready candidates for rebellion are those who find the source of
their personal failure in the structure of society rather than in them-
selves. The rebel regards the prevailing goals and standards as purely
arbitrary, not commanding his allegiance. His object is to produce a
closer correspondence between merit, effort and reward. Rebellion
differs from ressentiment in that the latter aims at no genuine change
in values; its pattern is rather that of sour grapes — one condemns
what one secretly cherishes and craves, whereas the rebel condemns
the craving itself (see also Cohen’s use of the concept of ambivalence,
Chapter 22 below).

The tramp or vagrant 34 has this in common with the rebel that he
refuses to fit into society, to belong to any of its social classes, and to
imitate the one or the other. He differs from the rebel in possessing no
positive ideal or cause for which to fight society; his antagonism is
purely negative and passive (see also below, Chapter 22, on Merton’s
‘retreatism’). In Britain, vagrancy as a mass-problem has practically
disappeared in the course of the present century as the result of full
employment and the changes produced by the Welfare State. The end
of full employment might revive it. In other countries the pheno-
menon still remains under various names; research is done on it, and
there exists a valuable literature, of which the work of A. Vexliard in
France and of John C. Spencer in Canada deserves special mention.
Of the great novelists who were fascinated by the subject, Maxim
Gorki perhaps deserves pride of place. The Russian tramp of the pre-
Soviet period was the hero of several of his novels and of his play
The Lower Depths. In the words of his most recent biographer,
Richard Hare, Gorki ‘brilliantly distinguished that internal tempera-
mental urge to vagrancy (deep-seated in many Russians and nomad
Asiatics) from the involuntary vagabondage imposed by unstable
employment and the threat of hunger’. 35

To go back to the subject of imitation, in Britain it means not only
copying the behaviour of higher social classes, but also that of
Americans; the class problem, however, is never far removed even
here because of the dominating role played by class in this process of
copying members of other nations who, on account of their greater
wealth, may also be regarded as socially superior. People who have
little experience in dealing with foreigners sometimes find it difficult
correctly to determine the social class to which the latter belong in
their own countries and are therefore easily misled by a display of
wealth, especially as they are as a rule unable to classify foreigners by
their accents.

The American Invasion (Francis Williams) has become a favourite
topic of discussion, and many observers of the contemporary scene
arc profoundly alarmed by this wholesale absorption of American

457

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

films, popular singers and comedians, fashions, gadgets, pills and
ideas. 30 British critics have found ample confirmation of their
anxieties in the work of such well-known American writers as Ries-
man, Packard and, still more recently, Boorstin, 37 all of them
denouncing with a wealth of material the sickness of modern
American society, the unreal nature of some of its foundations, some
of its false values and exaggerations. Mistakes in the upbringing of
children are among the most dangerous of these exaggerations.

It is certainly true that, as an American critic of Francis Williams’
book puts it, ‘each country chooses for itself the way in which it wants
to obliterate the national soul; if it happens in Britain, it won’t be
because of chewing gum and supermarkets’. 38 It is also tragically
true, however, that this fateful choice has been, and is being, made all
too easy by the blandishments of American big business and its
powerful British allies. This country, as are many others, is deeply
indebted to the United States not only for its material help in war and
post-war years but also for its great contributions in the scientific
fields. Modern criminology, too, as the present writer has repeatedly
pointed out and the present book bears witness, 30 owes much of its
recent progress to the stimulus received from American scholars, and
it can safely be said that they are no less disturbed than Europeans by
the manifestations of the cultural ‘diffusion’ which we are witnessing.
And, as J. B. Priestley has recently written, ‘remember, we mostly
borrow what thoughtful Americans have been condemning for years’
(New Statesman, 26.10.1962, p. 564).

II. CRIMINOLOGICAL IMPLICATIONS

Some readers of this chapter and of the preceding one may have been
wondering whether this discussion, or at least part of it, really belongs
to a textbook on criminology. Is it necessary, is it tactful to touch on
these sore points, to rub in certain painful truths which should better
be left to politicians, journalists and sociologists? Our answer is that
without such discussions criminology has no right to claim its place
as a branch of the social sciences. We have tried to reproduce the
facts of the situation; and the feelings of members of different social
classes as reflected in our quotations are important socio-psycho-
logical facts which cannot be ignored.

To the criminologist, as already stated, the class problem has a
twofold significance. He is interested first in the statistical class
distribution of offenders, and, secondly, in the question of whether
and how class differences and conflict may be actually responsible
for crime. As according to the plan of this book class is one of the
pivotal concepts in our discussion of criminological problems many

458

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY II

subjects will, wholly or in part, be treated in this context which in
other textbooks are dealt with under entirely different headings. This
applies in particular to the subject of juvenile delinquency, various
aspects of which are treated here (see, e.g., Chapter 22) instead of
being reserved for Chapter 26 which deals with the subject of age.

In parenthesis, it may be noted that the concept of class has
occasionally also been used in criminal legislation. The German Penal
Code contained, until 1960, a provision (§ 130), which threatened
with a fine or imprisonment up to two years ‘any person who
publicly in a manner which could endanger the peace of the com-
munity incited different classes of the population to acts of violence
against one another’. ‘Class’ in this section was, according to a
decision of the former Supreme Court of the Reich, to be defined as
‘the natural limbs of the organism of the nation, grown out of the soil
of its society and differentiated according to property and calling,
occupation and trade, education and ancestry’. 40 However, the
concept of ‘class’ has in the present version of the Code (Act of
30.6.1960) been replaced as ‘sociologically out-of-date’ 41 by the
more neutral and comprehensive phrase ‘parts of the population’,
which is intended to cover any groups within the population which
can, in some way or another, be distinguished from others, provided
they have a certain size and significance. Commentators of the Act
have mentioned as examples the workers, peasants, civil servants,
Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Bavarians, and political parties (Schwarz-
Dreher). The maximum penalty has now been raised to five years’
imprisonment, in addition to which a fine can be imposed.

In English law, one of the forms of sedition, which is a common
law misdemeanour, consists of an attempt to promote feelings of ill-
will and hostility between different classes of Her Majesty’s subjects, 42
and an Act dealing with racial hatred is in preparation.

This kind of law has, of course, no bearing on the criminological
problems of the present section.

1. Class Distribution of Offenders in General

There is a conspicuous lack of information on this subject. In Britain,
neither criminal statistics nor prison statistics contain anything on it;
even such potential indices of class as occupation and educational
standard of offenders are not recorded, although several foreign
countries include them in their official statistics. 43 We are, therefore,
left with little more than the widespread general impression that crime
is most prevalent among the members of the lower social classes, and
for further information we have to rely on certain limited private
studies of specific samples or categories of offenders. For Denmark,

459

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

Preben Wolf has recently made a study of the class distribution of a
sample of over 3,000 Danish males aged 21 and over. 44 Of this sample

10 per cent had been at least once found guilty of an offence against
the Penal Code and another 9 per cent of an offence against the
special laws outside the Code. Using the Danish sociologist Svalas-
toga’s scheme of nine social classes, Wolf found that there was a
difference between offenders against the Penal Code and offenders
against special laws such as traffic-laws, by-laws, and laws mainly
violated by white collar criminals. For offenders against the Penal
Code the distribution was as follows (the percentage figures for
offenders against the special laws will be given in brackets) : Of the
total number of persons in the sample belonging to the 4 upper
classes 2 per cent (11 per cent) were offenders, of the total in class 5,
4 per cent (8 per cent), in class 6, 5 per cent (10 per cent), in class 7,

1 1 per cent (9 per cent), in class 8,15 per cent (7 per cent), in class 9
and unknown, 16 per cent (26 per cent). There is, thus, a steady
increase in the percentage of offenders against the Penal Code as
we move down the social scale, whereas for other offenders the move-
ment is rather irregular. Moreover, the number of registered offences
per person also increased fairly steadily in the same direction. Wolf
leaves it open how far these results may have been influenced by the
likelihood of the offender’s subsequent decline in social class as a
consequence of his conviction; and he also discusses the view that
most penal legislations are biased in favour of the groups in power
and that, therefore, the criminal law is written ‘primarily with refer-
ence to the types of crime committed by people of lower economic
levels’. As the present writer has pointed out elsewhere, 45 there is
much truth in this contention. The history of criminal legislation, in
England and many other countries, shows that excessive prominence
was given by the law to the protection of property against compara-
tively minor depredations, which of course means that the types of
offences likely to be committed by members of the lower social
classes figure more predominantly than others in criminal statutes
and, therefore, also in the criminal courts and criminal statistics. On
the other hand, there was a marked reluctance to treat the various
forms of fraud as criminal offences. For the details reference may be
made to that earlier discussion of the subject. It is only in compara-
tively recent times that those forms of anti-social behaviour more
congenial to the position, ways of life, and mentality of the higher
social classes have been seriously considered for inclusion in the
penal codes and statutes. The differences in class distribution between
offenders against the Danish Penal Code and other statutes, as
discovered by Wolf, are here significant. It is, however, not only the
Fact that so much of penal legislation is aimed at the misbehaviour of

460

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY II

the lower classes that explains their predominance in criminal statis-
tics; it is also their higher ‘visibility’, i.e. ‘the extent to which they
come to the attention of people within a society’. 46 While this pheno-
menon has been discussed mainly in the U.S.A. in connection with
the high Negro crime rate, 47 it has important bearings upon the
differential class crime rate in general. This does not mean that
offences, once they have been brought before the criminal courts, are
given less publicity if the person charged belongs to a higher social
class; usually the contrary is true. If, for example, a member of the
peerage or another ‘titled’ person appears in court accused of a
motoring or a homosexual offence the case is often reported more
prominently and at greater length because of its publicity value, 48
whereas it may remain unnoticed if a lower-class offender is con-
cerned. Nor does it mean that the sentences imposed betray any
signs of ‘class justice’ in favour of the higher classes; again, the
opposite may be true because judges or magistrates may 'lean over
backwards’ to guard themselves against the slightest suspicion of
class bias. Certain exceptions have been tentatively noted in the
recent study of magisterial sentencing policy by Roger G. Hood 49
who found it likely that the percentage of prison sentences, as con-
trasted with more lenient forms of disposal such as fines, differed
according to the social composition of the community and the
magisterial bench. It seemed to him, on the strength of his statistical
material and his on-the-spot observations, that the working-class
offender may be more severely dealt with in a community with a
strong middle-class element and that the social composition of the
bench when combined with certain community characteristics might
be an additional factor in affecting the prison rate. While the material
on which Hood’s tentative conclusions are based is too limited to
warrant any more definite statements his hypothesis is important
enough to be followed up by further research on a larger scale.
However, in our present context we are concerned with class differ-
ences not in sentencing policy but in the actual crime rate.

The real meaning of the concept of differential social ‘visibility’ is
that our whole approach to, and our interpretation of, social mis-
behaviour may right from the beginning be coloured by unconscious
distinctions related to class. To give but one, admittedly trivial,
illustration: according to a report in The Times (19.5.1962) ‘rockets
were fired from the rooftops, bottles were hurled from windows and
fire extinguishers were let off when the ancient feud between Jesus
and Exeter Colleges broke out again in Oxford tonight (May 1 8). The
city police had to intervene after the narrow street which separates
the two colleges had become a litter of broken glass . . . But no
undergraduates were arrested.’ This report probably aroused only

461

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

some mild amusement in the minds of the readers of The Times, but
what might have been their reaction if something similar had been
reported of a fight between two juvenile gangs in East or South
London or Glasgow? No wonder that we suspect this differential
approach of ours to have some influence on the official crime rates of
classes and of areas.

Exact statistical evidence is difficult to obtain. In one of the few
recent investigations of the crime problem in this country where
attention is paid to class differences, Terence Morris’s study of
Croydon, 150 the author states that among his group of persons
charged the descriptions ‘labourer’, ‘dealer’ and ‘no gainful occu-
pation’ occurred ‘with monotonous regularity’. Among his group of
probation and Approved School cases no child came from the two
upper classes I and II, although in the total population of Croydon
these classes were larger than the lowest classes IV and V ; and for
boys and girls together the distribution of delinquent cases was: class
III: 1 case per 3,003 ; class IV: 1 per 380; class V: 1 per 187. Rejecting
the hypothesis that this may merely reflect partiality on the part of
police and prosecution Morris concludes that ‘ legally defined delin-
quency is a social characteristic of the working classes in general and
the family of the unskilled worker in particular. The behaviour of
individuals in other social classes is so organized that departure from
established norms is far less likely to bring the non-conformist into
collision with the criminal law’ (p. 167).

Albert IC. Cohen has shown that in the United States, too, most
juvenile offenders come from the lower classes (see below, Chapter
22, 2(b), pp. 507-12). Researches carried out by Austin L. Porterfield
in Texas, which showed that all of 337 college students interviewed
confessed to having committed unreported offences, are interesting,
but hardly sufficient in scope to warrant different conclusions. 61

As far as ‘visibility’ in the juvenile courts is concerned, Lady
Wootton, a London juvenile court chairman of long experience,
writes: ‘Until the age of criminal responsibility is raised for all
children, the present social discrimination will continue by which the
misdeeds of public school children are dealt with (as they should be)
between home and school while offenders from less favoured circles
are made the subject of criminal charges’ (The Times, 13.2.1963).

2. Class Distribution for Specific Offences

It goes without saying that class distribution varies greatly according
to type of offence. In English social history, poaching and vagrancy
used to stand out as typically lower-class offences. Trevelyan writes : 52
‘Poaching was not only the livelihood of outlaws, but the passion of

462

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY II

men of all classes’, but the crucial difference was that the law dis-
criminated between them and made the passion of the gentry legal
and that of the others criminal. Radbruch and Gwinner, who devote
an ill uminating chapter of their History of Crime to the corresponding
position in Germany, quote the word of Ernst Landsberg, the his-
torian of German jurisprudence, that poaching ‘was a privileged field
of the activities of a mischievous class legislation’. 53 The dominating
part played by vagrancy in the development of professional crime is
too well-known to need any elaboration (see also Radbruch-Gwin-
ner, Chapter 9).

Turning to the present time, Wolf’s study (above, s. 1) shows the
differential class distribution of offences in his Danish material.
Otherwise, evidence is available only for a few categories of offences,
mostly for sex offenders. According to the Cambridge study, 54 of its
total sample of nearly 2,000 sex offenders 1 1 per cent had more than
an elementary education, which is probably higher than the rate for
the general male population, and the proportion was higher (14-8 per
cent) in the homosexual than in the heterosexual (4-3 per cent) and
the indecent exposure (9-6 per cent) groups. The occupational dis-
tribution, too, showed a preponderance of professional and other
higher occupations among the homosexuals (11-7 per cent against
4-6 per cent for the heterosexuals and 3-2 per cent for exhibitionists).
In Fitch’s group of 139 men convicted of sex offences against
children, 55 also, the homosexuals came from a higher social level than
the heterosexuals. Neither of these investigations, however, compares
the class level of sex offenders with that of other categories of
offenders or of the general population. In addition to their class
distribution there is another peculiarity which characterizes certain
sex offences, especially rape: their dependence on social attitudes
towards sexual behaviour, which in their turn are greatly affected by
national, regional and class morality — although here, too, a great deal
of levelling has taken place in recent years. 56 Whether certain sexual
activities are regarded as rape or indecent exposure and whether they
are made the subject of court proceedings and lead to convictions
will, at least in certain borderline cases, depend upon the social class
of all those concerned. 57

Offences which require a certain level of educational and cultural
refinement, or can be committed only by persons in positions of
trust and have therefore, as a rule, middle-class rather than working-
class character, are art forgeries and embezzlement. The former can
be successful only if the forger possesses some genuine understanding
of the style of the artist whom he copies; in his case the process of
imitation often rises to the level of a real art, and it may show some of
the qualities of artistic creation. It is only when the imitator exploits

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

his specific gifts in order to deceive and defraud others that his
activities enter the field of crime. The psychological, sociological and
artistic problems involved have been brilliantly analysed in several
publications by Thomas Wiirtenberger. 58 As he points out, art
forgeries were practically unknown and pointless in the Christian
Middle Ages because the person of the artist was of little interest to
the public compared with the religious value of the painting: ‘The
world admired the religious content of the altarpiece more than the
person of the generally anonymous artist. 5 It was only in the Renais-
sance, when individualism and the idea of the unique originality of a
work of art arose, that art forgeries began to make sense at all. The
latter became really profitable, however, only with the coming into
existence of a class of wealthy patrons, first the princes and great
aristocrats, later the bourgeois capitalists and nouveaux riches.
Especially the latter, blessed with plenty of money and the burning
desire to emulate aristocratic traditions but little understanding of
art, are indispensable for large scale forgeries to flourish. Wiirten-
berger refers in particular to the post-war West German Wirtschafts-
wunder, but similar conditions have been noticeable for nearly a
century to an ever growing extent in the whole Western world, led by
the United States. The modern multi-millionaire, partly to impress
his friends and competitors, partly to find a ‘safe’ investment for his
fortune or to re-sell with great profit or to buy a title, spends enor-
mous sums on genuine or faked works of art either to keep them in
his own home or to present them to a museum (for which he can, at
least in the United States, obtain some considerable tax benefits).
The ingenious manner in which the snobbery or greed of such men
has been exploited by highly skilled forgers is common knowledge.
We are here faced with an interesting illustration of the part played
in crime causation by social class problems on the side of the victim
(see also below, Chapter 25). As further pointed out by Wiirten-
berger, while painters and sculptors may belong to a variety of
social classes, a strikingly large number of forgers are sons of famous
artists and many of them are highly qualified technically and artis-
tically. 69 Radbruch and Gwinner, too, have stressed the great varieties
of social class among artists (at the end of the Renaissance): ‘in
addition to such princely figures as Titian, Rubens or Michelangelo,
and the financially secure middle class of painters there existed an
artistic proletariat, due largely to over-production and the fact that the
Church had ceased to commission works of art . . . The consequence
. . . was the growth of art forgeries on a large scale . . .’ (p. S3).

Embezzlers are often bank clerks or other white collar employees or
solicitors, 00 in short, middle-class people who, for various reasons,
have lived beyond their means or incurred gambling losses too heavy

464

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY II

for them to bear. Working-class persons have comparatively fewer
opportunities to dispose of ‘other people’s money’; from the legal
point of view, their offences in this sphere will rather be classified as
‘larceny by a servant’. Cressey’s case material 61 provides good illus-
trations of the principal types involved. Jerome Hall , 62 on the other
hand, thinks that embezzlers are to be found among all classes, but
his long list of cases which, taken from newspaper reports, is of course
not representative, hardly bears this out. He offers, however, some
other interesting observations on the subject. Whereas, according to
him, the moral and social values held by thieves are opposed to those
of the community and the latter is in no doubt that larcenies have to
be prosecuted and punished, it is, according to Hall, different with
embezzlers. They are very often not prosecuted, and their employers
are inclined to hush matters up. This is true, but what is the explana-
tion? Is it that embezzling is regarded as something less serious than
stealing? Considering that it involves a breach of trust absent in
ordinary cases of theft the opposite should be true. The real explana-
tion may be, first, that employers may feel that they are themselves to
blame for having selected their employees badly; secondly, that em-
bezzlers and their employers often belong to the same middle class,
although probably to different subdivisions, which creates certain
social links between them; and, thirdly, closely connected with this,
that, as Hall points out, the embezzler presents no real challenge to
the values of the community which he himself shares. The profes-
sional thief or burglar has no counterpart in this field. There are very
few professional embezzlers, partly because the mentality and posi-
tion of embezzlers usually go against the ideology of professional
crime and partly, of course, because the embezzler, once convicted,
will as a rule find it difficult to obtain another position of trust. All
this, however, is an indication of the fundamentally middle-class
character of this type of offence.

Abortionists may be middle-class doctors, but probably in the
majority of cases they are more or less unqualified quacks.

For shoplifting children it has been found by Gibbens and Prince
that there was a very slight preponderance of the professional-
teacher-clerical workers group among their fathers as compared
with the general population; the difference is too slight, however, to
be statistically significant . 63

It has occasionally been suggested that auto thieves tend to come
from ‘favoured’ middle-class families, but here too the evidence
seems very slender . 64 The motives behind auto theft cover such a
wide range from mere pleasure to robbery that one can hardly
expect to find any similarity of social types among these offenders.
Scotland Yard distinguishes three such types: adolescents wishing to

ccn-E 465

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

have a joy ride; professional thieves who need another person’s car
to do a job, after which the vehicle is abandoned; and profes-
sional car dealers who take the stolen cars to pieces {The Times ,
31.10.1960).

This leads to the closely allied subject of motoring offences, closely
allied not only because motor cars are used in both auto theft and
motoring offences but also because the former very often leads to the
latter. From the quantitative point of view, motoring offences have
become the most important of all. In 1961, they numbered 712,584
(persons found guilty) out of 970,180 persons found guilty of all non-
indictable offences in England and Wales ( Criminal Statistics, 1961,
p. xxvi), and in addition there are some indictable offences committed
by motorists in the course of driving. Barbara Wootton has severely
censured criminologists for ignoring this revolution in the traditional
crime structure ‘to a degree that really queers all criminological dis-
cussion’; and, she thinks, ‘Apparently on the Marxian principle that
the law is made and operated in the interests of the well-to-do,
motoring offences ... are not ordinarily thought to “count” as
crimes at all.’ 65

This underlines a point made by the present writer many years
before, in the course of his discussion of the whole subject of criminal
negligence referred to above in Chapter 17, II(6). 66 It is certainly true
that criminological research in this field, though by no means as
completely non-existent as Wootton thinks, 67 is not yet of the com-
prehensive and systematic nature required for this many-sided sub-
ject, but this failure is not primarily due to the indifference and
incompetence of criminologists but to the popular misconceptions
still apparent in this field. It is only very recently that a comprehen-
sive study of the subject, with some first-hand research, has been made
in this country: T. C. Willett’s Criminal on the Road. GS

Our present discussion is not concerned with motoring offences in
general, but merely with one, admittedly important, aspect; their
class character. Here again, exact statistical information on the class
distribution of offending motorists is lacking, and we can only try to
draw a few tentative conclusions from our general impressions and
from scattered foreign material. There can be no doubt that after the
last war a wholesale revolution has taken place in the class distri-
bution of motorists. Previously the privilege of the well-to-do, the
possession of a motor car has now become one of the status symbols
of the working and lower middle classes. In Zweig’s samples the
percentages of factory workers who owned a car varied from 12 to 40,
though the latter figure, referring to Vauxhall, was not regarded as
representative. 69 The question arises how far this extension of car-
ownership has affected the class distribution of those who arc found

466

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY II

guilty of motoring offences. It has to be borne in mind that commit-
ting such offences does not necessarily imply car-ownership, and that
even in pre-war times many lorry or taxi drivers and similar non-
owners appeared in court on these charges. Nevertheless, the image
created in the minds of magistrates and wide circles of the public was
that of the motoring offender as a ‘nice man’ who was not a criminal
and found himself in court largely through a combination of circum-
stances for which he was only mildly, if at all, to blame. Today when
most magistrates and perhaps the majority of people over 17 are
motorists, traffic offences are no longer status symbols or even char-
acteristic of certain occupations but have become a phenomenon
common to all classes.

For the special category of motorists found guilty of driving under
the influence of drink Middendorff, the German criminologist and
traffic judge, had previously expressed the view that they often be-
longed to the ‘so-called better strata’, but in a more recent study he
suggests that this group has been declining because of the effect of the
publicity campaign against drunken drivers which, he thinks, has been
more effective with middle-class people than with the newcomers
from the working classes. 70 Whether this applies to conditions in
Britain may be doubtful, and in particular, the frequency with which
doctors are charged with drunken driving is remarkable.

After this had been written, Willett’s careful examination of the
class distribution of motoring offenders was published (Ch. 8). In
his Surrey sample, which is admittedly not entirely representative
of the national distribution, he found no evidence for Barbara
Wootton’s view that motoring offenders come mainly from the upper
social classes. In fact, the two lowest classes were over-represented in
his sample, although the skilled manual workers were under-repre-
sented. The class distribution differed, however, in an interesting way
according to the type of motoring offences; for example there was a
particularly high proportion of manual workers among those con-
victed of driving while disqualified and failing to insure, while the
highest proportion of non-manuals was found in the group con-
victed of driving under the influence of drink, a disparity for which
Willett produces some plausible explanations. Of considerable inter-
est arc also Willett’s findings (a) that even serious motoring offenders
did not, as a rule, regard themselves as ‘criminals’ but were, when
more closely questioned, rather confused about the meaning of this
term which they vaguely associated only with offences showing dis-
honesty and malice; a minority of those interviewed, however, re-
garded driving under the influence of drink and failing to stop after
an accident as ‘criminal’. Women drivers had a stronger feeling of
guilt than men; ( b ) that motoring offenders were treated by the

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

police and the courts in a way very different from other offenders, and
most of them were regarded as ‘highly respectable*.

Although we are in this book not concerned with penological
questions attention should be drawn to the fact that class differences
play their part and often hamper the treatment of offenders, be it in
institutions such as Borstals or in probation and aftercare work.
The idea of Borstal treatment has been taken from the English public
school system, and its atmosphere and ideology are therefore largely
incomprehensible to the young urban toughs with whom it has to
deal. Borstal and Approved School housemasters, as probation
officers and other social workers, often come from middle-class
families whose ways of thinking may be fundamentally different from
those of their charges, and the same applies to the vdluntary worker
in prison aftercare.

468

Chapter 21

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY III:

WHITE COLLAR AND OTHER ‘NON-
WORKING-CLASS’ CRIMES 1

I. INTRODUCTORY

Notwithstanding the clear statistical association between certain
property offences, especially larceny, and lower social class it cannot
be said that to any of the offences so far discussed, or indeed to any
other category of offences, the idea of social class conflict is essential.
Although it will but rarely happen, an act of stealing or house-
breaking can be committed by a person of high social standing as
well. White collar crime (WCC) is different: here the very fact of the
offender’s membership of a certain social class is an inherent, built-
in, element. No doubt, many offenders steal because stealing is to
them a natural expression of the feeling of belonging to an under-
privileged social class (see below, Chapter 22), but there are many
others who have no such feelings or whom it does at least not drive to
larceny. And it is similar with acts of violence which may or may not
be motivated by class conflict. This applies even to political assassin-
ations as political conflict may be due to causes other than class
differences, especially to nationalistic or racial fanaticism. Cases
such as that of the man, described as a ‘general labourer’, who
not long ago stabbed a Conservative Member of Parliament, Sir
Walter Bromley-Davenport, ‘because of his title — no one should
have a title’ (The Times, 19 and 28.6.1962), are rather exceptional.
The details published in the press were too scanty to allow us to
judge whether this was the act of a mentally disordered individual
or a political crime in the traditional sense of the term, but it has
to be borne in mind that, generally speaking, political crimes are
committed in order to further the objects of political movements,
large or small, not the idiosyncrasies of isolated individuals. 2 In the
present case, the attacker seems to have acted as a lone wolf, an
‘outsider’. Whether he would conform to Camus’s conception of
the rebel (Chapter 20 above) is impossible to decide on the basis of
the facts so far known, but it seems unlikely.

469

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

The white collar criminal is neither a political offender nor a rebel.
He exploits the weaknesses of society rather than rebelling against
its iniquities, and his interest in the reform of the legal, political and
social system is normally confined to changes which might enable
him to make more and more money and to get more and more
influence in order to exert increasing pressure to obtain his selfish
objects.

The concept of WCC will always, and rightly, be connected with
the writings of the late Edwin H. Sutherland of the University of
Indiana. There is no Nobel Prize as yet for criminologists, and prob-
ably there never will be one, but if it had been available, Sutherland
would have been one of the most deserving candidates for his work on
WCC. It is certainly true that similar ideas had been expressed before
him. Merton, 3 for example, draws attention to the otherwise little-
known writings of Ambrose Bierre who at the beginning of the cen-
tury ‘described the ways in which the successful rogue achieves social
legitimacy’ and anatomized the ‘discrepancies between cultural values
and social relations’. Bloch and Geis (p. 381) quote some relevant
passages from the far better-known textbook of criminology by
Albert Morris, published in 1934, and Terstegen (p. 82) refers to an
English book, Edwin Hill’s Criminal Capitalists of 1872.

The present writer included a chapter on ‘Methods of Business
Administration’ in his study of Crime in England between the two
World Wars (1940), trying to show that ‘certain methods of large-
scale business administration are bound to produce corresponding
types of lawbreaking’ and stressing that these methods ‘may cover
the whole range of activities from the manifestly criminal ones to
those that, in themselves, are not only perfectly honest and useful,
but even indispensable for the well-being of the community at large’
(p. 186). Among other matters, he dealt with the criminological
effects of various forms of insurance and with hire purchase. In War
and Crime, published in 1941, the emphasis was on the psychology of
great businessmen criminals, such as Kreuger and Bottomley, and
their driving motives, vanity and greed, and a comparison was made
between them and great war criminals such as Hitler.

The main difference between the study of business methods in
Social Aspects and Sutherland’s work was that, whereas the former
was concerned with what were regarded as inevitable by-products of
certain legitimate business activities, Sutherland described, defined,
and attacked some of these activities themselves as white collar
crimes. Moreover, he produced a comprehensive theory of this
phenomenon which he tried to fix into his general explanation of
criminal behaviour. While much of his work in this field is of lasting
value and deserves to be regarded as one of the most important

470

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY IU

discoveries in the history of criminology, some of it suffers from
weaknesses which have been detrimental to the progress and general
acceptance of his ideas. In the following a brief summary of both the
credit and the debit side will be given within the framework of our
general discussion of the subject.

Considerable progress has been made in this field since Suther-
land’s principal contributions were published, in part through the
collection of case material, mainly, however, through the growing
clarification of the theoretical concepts involved. In both directions
we are still primarily indebted to American writers. Case material
has been presented by Clinard, Cressey, Hartung, Newman (see Note
1), and in particular in the Report on the United States Senate Hear-
ings in the ‘General Electric’ cases of 1961. 4 Theoretical clarification
and refinement have been effected by Geis, Geis-Bloch, Newman,
Clinard, Tappan and others. The almost inevitable result of this
near-monopoly of American thinking, case material and writing on
the subject has been, however, that its discussion has become too
extensively concentrated on American conditions, American big
business, American Anti-Trust law and similar legislation, and on
American judicial and administrative procedure. The very term
‘white collar’, though common to all parts of the English-speaking
world, has if used in conjunction with the word ‘crime’ assumed a
very specific meaning bestowed on it by Sutherland, but — as will be
pointed out immediately — differing from common usage. It has been
adopted by most non-English-speaking writers as well; Terstegen, for
example, in his highly perceptive contribution translates it into Ger-
man as Weisse Kragen-Kriminalitat but abandons the latter at once in
favour of the American term.

II. DEFINITIONS

Although Sutherland stressed that his definition of WCC was merely
‘approximate’ and nothing definitive it has been generally accepted ; it
had five elements: (a) it was a crime; ( b ) committed by a person of
respectability and (c) of high social status; (d) in the course of his
occupation . 5

Moreover, fifthly, it is usually a violation of trust. The first of these
five elements, i.e. that a ‘crime’ must have been committed, is of
fundamental importance. Sutherland has often been accused of
trying to extend his concept of WCC beyond the limits of actions
punishable under the criminal law, in particular by including wrongs
generally dealt with not as crimes but by the civil or administrative
law, and thereby.making it even less concise and useful for scientific
purposes. It is true that some of his many pronouncements on the

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

subject seem to justify such charges; basically, however, as already
stated above (Chapter 2, 1), he tried to keep WCC strictly within the
scope of the criminal law (see, e.g., Annals , p. 112: ‘a white collar
crime is defined as a violation of the criminal law . . He was right
in doing so, but here as elsewhere we have to distinguish between
things as they are and things as they might and should be. Here as
elsewhere it is the right and the duty of the criminologist to collect
matgyial concerning the territory which surrounds the inner zone of
conduct violating the existing criminal law, material which might in
suitable cases be used for recommendations for its reform (see
above, pp. 13 and 77-8).

The fourth element in Sutherland’s definition is entirely non-
controversial; nobody would call a murder committed by a director
of a large company for reasons of jealousy or the manslaughter of a
pedestrian committed by him on a holiday excursion or a homo-
sexual offence by a member of the Peerage a WCC. The second and
third elements, however, are more doubtful. What does ‘respecta-
bility’ mean in this connection? Probably absence of previous con-
victions; or did Sutherland mean only absence of convictions of
offences of the traditional type such as stealing? In any case, it
differs from the third element, ‘high social status’, in being less closely
related to social class; an illiterate and unskilled labourer can be
highly respectable, but not of ‘high social status’. 6 On the other hand,
how far does the latter concept imply respectability? According to
Sutherland, apparently not necessarily, and there can indeed be
persons of high social status who are not respectable. The latter
quality may depend more on the judgment of the public at large,
whereas the former may rather reflect the views and prejudices of
certain sections.

Whatever may be our views on such matters of detail, even a
radical opponent of the whole concept of WCC such as Tappan
admitted that Sutherland’s original attempts to define it were a
‘fruitful beginning’, pointing to ‘the significant and difiicult problems
of enforcement in the areas of business crimes . . .’ 7 /

In fact, this original definition, vague and inadequate as it was, had
at least the merit of clarifying Sutherland’s scientific objective, which
was, in his words, not ‘muckraking’ but ‘to call attention to a vast
area of criminal behaviour which is generally overlooked . . .’ ( Annals ,
p. 1 12). Even if limited to his original category of persons of ‘high
social status’ this would have amounted to a Copernican revolution
in criminology; if backed by adequate case material it would have
represented the perfect antidote to the one-sided preoccupation of
traditional criminology with lower-class crime and delinquency. ‘It
made articulate the vague feeling of some of us that much of our

472

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY III

work so far had been lop-sided and our conclusions misleading,’ 8
and it was a serious attempt to give the right balance to crimino-
logical thinking. As Newman rightly says, ‘interest in WCC [is] a
sign of maturity of both theory and method’ (p. 736). Unfortunately,
Sutherland committed two definitional mistakes which made his
concept even more vulnerable to attack than it had been from the
outset on account of its vagueness and unorthodoxy: on the one
hand, he limited it to crimes of corporations— his most comprehen-
sive work on the subject is in fact little more than an analysis of the
offences committed by seventy of the largest American business cor-
porations— and, on the other, rather illogically he included in it
crimes by persons who could in no way be classified as of ‘high
social status’. The present writer can hardly be suspected of under-
estimating the importance of the big corporation in modem life 9 —
there are now about 331,000 registered companies in this country,
eleven times as many as in 1900 10 — and there is little doubt that in the
field of WCC, if it is really confined to the ‘big fish’, the practical
problem will largely be one of the corporation. This, however, is no
adequate reason for ignoring the — admittedly rare — white collar
offender who conducts his business as an individual or who, while
conducting his business through a corporation, nevertheless com-
mits certain offences closely connected with it (e.g. tax evasions in his
own or his wife’s income declarations) in his private capacity. Some
of the legal difficulties arising from crimes committed by corporations
will be dealt with below in section IV(b).

On the other hand, in his references to illustrative case material
Sutherland himself went, quite consciously, beyond the realm of
large corporations and offenders of ‘high social status’ by including
frauds or thefts by middle-class, even Iower-middle-class, people such
as poorly paid bank clerks, owners of small car, watch, radio and
typewriter repair shops and salesmen. 11 This use of the term ‘white
collar’ is perfectly in fine with the general usage in the U.S.A. as well
as in Britain. C. Wright Mills, for example, in his monograph
devoted to the sociological, non-eriminological, aspects of the matter
—it is characteristic of the lack of interest in criminological problems
shown by sociologists who are not criminologists themselves that
the name of Sutherland does not appear in the index of his lengthy
book first published in 1951 — deals in it with practically every type of
work except manual labour. 12 Similarly Vance Packard who shows,
moreover, that there has been in recent years ‘a revolutionary blur-
ring of the boundary line between white- and blue-collared people’
mainly by downgrading the former (The Status Seekers, p, 36). In
Britain, the existence of large and powerful ‘white collar’ trade
unions with hundreds of thousands of members demonstrates

473

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

convincingly that the term is used here in a far wider sense than
Sutherland’s.

From the point of view of Sutherland’s definition, the inclusion in
his case material of the masses of comparatively humble people was
inconsequent 13 and, as Geis observes, seems to point to the dearth of
his material on ‘high-status’ crime. In our view the right way out of
this impasse is either to use the phrase ‘ white collar ’ in accordance with
common parlance by admitting to it the whole of the middle classes not,
as Sutherland did, by the backdoor but quite openly or to restrict it to
the ‘ high status' class and to deal with crimes committed by members of
the ‘ non high status' middle classes separately. The present writer
would prefer the second alternative. The decision may be of termino-
logical rather than practical importance as long as we make sure that
no section of the non-working-class population is excluded from our
criminological investigations. It is clear, however, that significant
features of WCC would be obscured if the first alternative should be
adopted and the difference between higher- and lower-class WCC be
altogether obliterated. In any case, we have to take account of the
fundamental changes in class structure which have occurred in the
course of this century (see above, Chapter 20). Sutherland’s concept
of ‘high social status’ is far too vague to be of much use within a
social system as complicated as that of the modern western world ;
he never gave a clear definition of the criteria which he regarded as
essential elements of this concept. Not every ‘company director’ or
‘executive’ is necessarily a person of ‘high social status’. If, very
legitimately, we wish to relate crime to the various social classes we
have to give a clear account of how we intend to draw the lines
between them. This having been done, we should try to show how the
characteristics of certain types of crime differ according to social
class. Sutherland, by indiscriminately lumping together offenders of
very different social classes, failed to reach this objective.

As already indicated, Sutherland’s insistence that the concept of
WCC requires a close relationship between the crime and the
offender’s occupation has given rise to no controversy. It is true,
however, that many non-white collar offenders also commit offences
closely connected with their occupations, for example, to name only a
few, domestic servants, postmen, or window cleaners (on this occu-
pational element see below. Chapter 23), and it has to be borne in
mind that this factor is only one of at least five elements in Suther-
land’s definition.

There is also a close relationship between the factor ‘persons of high
social status’ and the emphasis on ‘ violation of trust' as the fifth
element in Sutherland’s definition, this notwithstanding the obvious
fact that such violations can also be committed by offenders lacking

474

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY III

such status, such as domestic servants and other minor employees
placed in positions where they are able to dispose of their em-
ployers’ property. Sutherland described seven methods of trust viola-
tions in the field of WCC, adding that there were doubtless many
others as well. 14 Among those which he specially mentioned were the
securing by executives of corporations of positions which offered
them opportunities to violate the trust which had been placed in
them or, as he expressed it in an earlier paper {Annals, p. 112), the
holding of ‘two or more incompatible and conflicting positions of
trust’ by businessmen; the payment of huge salaries and bonuses to
directors at a time when their corporations had net losses ; the ‘looting
of a subsidiary by a parent corporation’ by purchasing the former’s
assets at too low a price; and public misrepresentation of the financial
affairs of the corporation. Most of the seventy large corporations
which he studied in his book had, he found, at times been guilty of
some of these violations of trust. He regarded the financial losses
from WCCs, vast as they were, as far less damaging to society than
the resulting undermining of the community’s confidence in its
leaders. Moreover, ‘leadership against white-collar crime is generally
lacking since most leaders come from the upper socio-economic class
and since the persons in this class who do not participate in white-
collar crimes are generally reluctant to attack other members of their
own class’ {Annals, p. 113). There is loyalty not only between
thieves. These observations are profoundly true, but mutatis mutandis
we find much the same obstacles to an effective and impartial ad-
ministration of criminal justice in the field of some non-WCC as well.
Unless personally injured many working-class people are equally
reluctant to appear in court as witnesses against their fellow workers.
The difference lies mainly in the far greater power of higher-class
persons imperceptibly to influence the course of justice right from the
start.

Terstegen makes the valuable point that one has to distinguish
between violations of confidence which is given not only after careful
consideration but also because it had to be given as there was no
other choice and, on the other hand, violations of confidence arbi-
trarily and foolishly placed in undeserving individuals or corpora-
tions (p. 91). He rightly stresses that modern society is of necessity
based upon mutual trust and that its economic life has become far too
hectic and complex to enable its individual members to do business
with one another only after painstaking and lengthy examination of
their respective trustworthiness. ‘Who buys from a dispensing chem-
ist s shop has to trust that he will be well served ; who buys drugs
from a pedlar trusts foolishly.’ In this connection he argues that there
are certain differences from one country to another regarding the

475

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

trustworthiness of businessmen and their customers : for example in the
United States it is throughout safe, he thinks, to accept payment by
cheque, whereas in Germany this is not yet the case. This is a subject
which has recently been studied for some parts of the United States
by Frederick K. Beutel who regards the popular estimate of total
annual losses to American business by bad cheques to the amount of
$500-600,000,000 as exaggerated; in his own state of Nebraska he
found the extent of the phenomenon to be insignificant. 15 The issuing
of bad cheques is of course WCC as a rule only in a wider than the
Sutherlandian sense since very few of such offenders will be persons of
‘high social status’.

It would be going too far, however, if we would limit the concept of
WCC to cases where a trust is violated which nolens volens had to be
given because of lack of any other alternative. This is true for large
sections of our economic life, where the consumer in order to acquire
food, shelter, clothing, and the other necessities of life, has to place
his trust in producers and distributors some of whom are not worthy
of it. Up to recently, the law and the courts gave no or entirely
inadequate protection against exploitations and deceptions in the
name of ‘freedom of trade’, that ‘perhaps most ambiguous and most
elusive of all the basic ideals of modern liberal democracy’. 16 It is
only in the course of the present century that in some of the legal
systems of the western world the need for consumer protection by the
civil, administrative and criminal law has slowly been recognized,
and even more recently that the great masses of consumers, those
most unorganized and long-suffering of all human animals, have
come together to build up a system of self-defence. Growing public
anxiety about the sharp practices of certain sections of industry and
trade led to the setting up of private organizations such as the Con-
sumers’ Association Ltd. with its publication Which ? and the Con-
sumer Advisory Council which published the Shopper's Guide and
also to the appointment in 1959 of the Molony Committee on con-
sumer protection, which reported in 1962. The recommendations of
this report have not yet produced all the desirable legislative changes.
Generally speaking, however, it can be said that the revolt of the
consumer coupled with the growing strength of the Welfare State has
in the course of the present century led to a multiplication of ‘public
welfare’ statutes (see above, Chapter 2, 1) which, as they are invariably
backed by penal provisions, have resulted in a considerable widening
of the scope of offences of the WCC type. While it has to be borne in
mind that certain forms of WCC bear all the characteristics of these
public welfare offences it would be a grave mistake to establish
without careful enquiry a presumption that all WCC belong to this
category and should enjoy the legal privileges connected with it.

476

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY III

III. FURTHER ANALYSIS OF SUTHERLAND'S THEORY

In addition to the two points of definition where we disagree with
Sutherland, there are certain other aspects of his theory which seem
to be unacceptable or acceptable only with reservations.

(а) He, quite naturally, tried to use his discovery of WCC as an
important illustration and justification of his pet theory of differential
association. While the case for and against this theory will be dis-
cussed in more general terms below (Chapter 23, E) a few brief
remarks are here needed regarding its specific value for the explana-
tion of WCC. Here, as elsewhere, we are ready to admit the value of
the theory in linking criminological thought to the modern psycho-
logical literature on learning. Sutherland performed this task in a
rather primitive fashion by submitting what he regarded as ‘two
types of documentary evidence,’ i.e. biographical or autobiograph-
ical material illustrating the careers of businessmen and, secondly,
‘descriptions of the diffusion of criminal practices from one situation
to another’ ( White Collar Crime, Chapter 14). As he admits, all his
documents come from young men in subordinate positions and are in
no way representative of the WC criminals whom he has in mind, and
he rightly complains that ‘unfortunately similar documents ... are
not available for the managers of large industries’ (p. 240) and that no
first-hand research on the subject has ever been published. Even
books demonstrating that ‘many of the large. American fortunes
originated in illegal practices’ fail, he thinks, to explain ‘theprocess by
which illegal behaviour develops in the person’. True as this may be,
the material presented by Sutherland is not sufficient to fill the gap
and to demonstrate the validity of his theory of differential associa-
tion. The examples he gives of the ‘diffusion of illegal practices’ (pp.
241 ff.) are in fact examples of the imitative effect of competition : if
one company makes profit by illegal business practices its competi-
tors are forced to do the same; no special theory of the kind for-
mulated by Sutherland is needed to explain this simple process, .

(б) Secondly, Sutherland, who was led astray by his conviction that
crime’ must always show essentially the same pattern regardless of
type of offence and varieties of offenders, insisted that through his
studies of WCC he had proved the insignificant role played by poverty
m the causation of criminal acts. ‘The general theories of criminal
behaviour which take their data from poverty and the conditions

..related to it’, he wrote, ‘are inadequate and invalid.’ 17 If by ‘inade-
quate he meant ‘incomplete’ we could agree with him; no single
explanation of criminal behaviour can ever be complete. But why
invalid’ ? For large numbers of offenders the economic explanation.

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

together with other factors, is entirely valid (see below, Chapter 23);
for others it has but little meaning; should we, therefore, discard it
altogether?

(c) One of the most frequent criticisms of Sutherland’s work on
WCC — as of his theory of differential association in general — refers
to his treatment of the psychological aspects of the matter. His ten-
dency to minimize the significance of the latter culminated in the
often-quoted sentences :

Business leaders are capable, emotionally balanced, and in no sense patho-
logical. We have no reason to think that General Motors has an inferiority
complex or that the Aluminium Company of America has a frustration-
aggression complex or that U.S. Steel has an Oedipus complex, or that the
Armour Company has a death wish or that Du Ponts desire to return to
the womb. The assumption that an offender must have some such patho-
logical distortion of the intellect or the emotions seems to me absurd, and
if it is absurd regarding the crimes of businessmen, it is equally absurd
regarding the crimes of persons in the lower economic class. 18

These sentences, which, by the way, were contained in a lecture
published only after his death, exhibit a strange mixture of truth and
falsehood, of self-evident and entirely unproven statements. Sig-
nificantly, they occur in a paper on ‘Crime of Corporations’ and in
their most striking formulation (second sentence of quotation) con-
tain nothing but the platitude that a corporation as such can have no
mens rea, no feelings, no sense of guilt, etc., and it required no
scholar of Sutherland’s stature to tell us that. In the preceding and the
subsequent sentences, however, he makes certain statements con-
cerning the mentality of the individual businessmen standing behind
the corporations for which he had no confirming evidence whatso-
ever. As mentioned before under (a), Sutherland himself deplored the
absence of adequate research or biographical material on such
questions as how ‘illegal behaviour develops in the person’ of indi-
vidual white collar offenders, and we are in fact largely dependent on
speculations as to their mental make-up, their attitudes and the
motives behind their actions. Occasional glimpses may be cast on all
this through whatever case histories might be available or through
works of literature such as Ibsen’s John Gabriel Borkman . 19

Neither on the strength of the available evidence nor on general
grounds is there any justification for Sutherland’s assumption that
big business tycoons have no psychological problems, that there are
among them no psychopaths or neurotics or men with a strong
feeling of guilt or people plagued and spurred on by an inferiority
complex— just as there is but little evidence for the opposite assump-
tion. This dearth of material on the psychological side of the subject

478

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY III

is not surprising, considering that the courts when dealing with such
cases are often not interested in it beyond the usual questions of
knowledge and intent, as far as the statute in question requires
positive answers to the latter. Psychoanalysts who might be privately
consulted by such offenders may know more about their problems,
but professional etiquette imposes silence. Even so, it does occa-
sionally happen that in the course of prolonged criminal trials or
U.S. Senate Hearings in anti-trust cases (see below, s. V(b)) some
light is shed on the mentality of the businessmen involved.

Sutherland, we are told by Cressey , 20 took the criticisms of his
alleged neglect of ‘personality factors’ seriously, but he believed that
his theory of differential association did sufficiently explain why some
persons with certain personality traits committed crimes whereas
others possessing the same traits did not. As Cressey’s further ob-
servations show, the theory was in fact not capable of adequately
answering this question and similar ones concerning the personality
structure of the WC criminal.

Sutherland’s critics have also gone astray on a few important
points. First, the contention that ‘only those are criminals who have
been adjudicated as such by the courts’ (Tappan) is not only socio-
logically but also legally mistaken since it confuses issues of sub-
stantive and of procedural law: according to the former — the only
one that interests us in the present context — a person is a criminal
who has violated one of its provisions, regardless of whether he has
been found guilty in accordance with the rules of criminal procedure.

Secondly, the sociological objections raised by Burgess are equally
mistaken. Burgess 21 has argued that WC offenders should not be
regarded as criminals because they do not conceive of themselves as
such. The answer to this argument is that while the ‘image’ which the
offender has of himself is of very considerable, often even of crucial,
significance psychologically for such matters as crime causation and
the prevention of recidivism, it cannot be the decisive factor for our
judgment whether or not he should be legally or sociologically
classified as an offender. The criminal law cannot be made completely
dependent on the offender’s own view of whether or not he has
violated the law and should be punished. As we have seen above,
many motoring offenders, too, are disinclined to regard themselves as
criminals; in spite of this, they are properly punished, although often
all too leniently.

Thirdly, and closely connected with the foregoing, there is what
may perhaps seem to be the most important objection: Void , 22 under
, e heading: ‘The Paradox: Reputable Persons as Criminals’, argues
at an obvious and basic incongruity’ is involved in Sutherland’s
contention that the responsible leaders of a community can also be

479

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

its criminals. Even if corporations may commit violations of regula-
tions concerning such matters as labour practices, trade and market-
ing agreements, advertising, and so on, yet ‘it raises some very
serious questions of both logical and theoretical consistency’ to
label the individuals involved as ‘criminals’. What makes a person a
criminal is, Void emphasizes, dependent on the ‘community defini-
tion’ just as much as on the actual behaviour of the individual.
Moreover, no law can be enforced, he rightly states, that does not
have ‘overwhelming popular support’ (p. 257), and such support is
not likely to be forthcoming in the United States with its ‘glorification
of the “free market” ’. In these, on the surface very persuasive, argu-
ments, truths and falsehoods are again closely interlocked. Big busi-
ness tycoons are not necessarily and automatically, as Void seems to
assume, ‘leaders of the community’ as far as moral and social leader-
ship is concerned. Sutherland’s view that WC offences committed by
such men are likely to undermine the confidence of the community in
its leaders is correct as, even if not every big businessman can be
accepted as a moral and social leader, the power and authority he
wields in his own particular sphere as a large-scale employer of
labour and a large-scale buyer and seller of goods makes him at least
an important figure in the economic and social life of the place.
Whether or not he deserves it, he will as a matter of course be given
honorary posts in local government and all sorts of private organ-
izations, as a lay magistrate, church warden, etc., and if he commits
offences this will cause a considerable shock to the community. To
use this as an argument against the possibility of WCC is, however, a
misconceived idea which does not do justice to the complexity and
many-sidedness of modern social life. Moreover, while it is true that
no law can in the long run be effectively enforced against public
opinion Void seems to assume too rashly that the public as a whole
are here on the side of the WC offender against the law-enforcing
agencies. As the present writer has said elsewhere, ‘there is a very
strong temptation in our field to base action or, more often still,
inaction on the alleged state of public opinion, without knowing
exactly what public opinion really wants and whether it wants any-
thing at all’. 23 Void’s argument is principally based on his knowledge
of the ‘traditional American view’ with its strong opposition to
government interference in business affairs, and so far we are not
competent to question his thesis; but granting all this, has there not
been, in spite of all traditional preference for laissez-faire, a ‘New
Deal’ even in the United States and has there not been a critical
reassessment of the role played by big business in America, Britain
and elsewhere ? A process of eye-opening has been taking place since
Sutherland’s first publications on the subject, a process which may

480

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY III

eventually make ‘public opinion’ more willing to support the author-
ities in their fight against WCC.

Bloch and Geis, while fully acknowledging the importance of
Sutherland’s work, regard his concept of WCC as too vague and all-
embracing to be of real scientific value. 24 He has failed, they think,
to ‘delineate clearly homogeneous types of offences’, and their solu-
tion is to concentrate on specific, well-definable forms of WCC such
as advertising frauds or violations of the anti-trust laws. While their
criticism is well-founded in particular on account of Sutherland’s
tendency to include a mixed bag of offences by lower-class persons,
the proposed solution can be accepted only as far as individual
researches are concerned, not, however, if it is intended to involve a
delimitation of the basic concept as such. Just as there is a compre-
hensive legal concept of false pretences, which embraces defrauda-
tions of the most diversified characteristics, so can very heterogeneous
forms of WCC be included in this sociological concept provided its
fundamental elements are preserved — a proviso which was un-
fortunately ignored by its originator. Under the umbrella of this
comprehensive sociological concept can very easily be brought vio-
lations of penal statutes dealing with a large number of anti-social
actions.

In his foreword to the second edition of Sutherland’s White Collar
Crime Cressey makes the point that future research on WCC should
try to determine the structural conditions of society which are
responsible for the existing differences in crime reporting: i.e. to
explain why in a given society certain crimes are noticed, whereas
others are ignored. To some extent, this is what we have been
attempting in the present and the immediately preceding chapters.

IV. LEGAL ASPECTS

The difficulties arising in the legal sphere from the introduction of the
sociological concept of WCC should not be under-rated. They are
mainly to be found in three directions : concerning ( a ) the legal struc-
ture and philosophy of ‘public welfare offences’, (b) the criminal law
of corporations, (c) the various problems of specific WC offences, such
as violations of anti-trust laws, statutes against the adulteration of
food, the sale of dangerous drugs, fraudulent advertising, tax evasions,
licensing offences, etc. There is, of course, much overlapping between
these three sets of subjects.

(o) Public welfare offences have been dealt with above in Chapter 2,
and all we have to do at present is to draw attention to the following
points: The origin of the modern tendency to create a new category
0 ukgal acts or omissions, loosely held together as ‘public welfare

ccn-P 481

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

offences’, lies in the growth of modern society with its gradual aban-
donment of the old laissez-faire economy and philosophy; in the
increasing political and economic power of the previously under-
privileged parts of the population and in their insistence on adequate
legal and penal protection against exploitation. As pointed out in that
chapter, the mass-character of these newly created offences, ‘the petti-
ness of most of them if taken individually, contrasted with their
dangerousness to society if considered in their totality’, led to the im-
pression, widely held among lawyers, that the traditional standards of
criminal justice with all the slowly and painfully evolved safeguards
of the rights of the accused could not be upheld in this special field.
Particularly strong is the tendency, among legislators as well as among
theoretical jurists, to water down or altogether to abandon the re-
quirement of individual guilt which has to be proved to the accused.
Moreover, it has been argued with a great deal of justification that
the administration of criminal justice has been dangerously overloaded
to near-breaking point with matters which should better be dealt with
by administrative agencies. With much of this the present writer is in
sympathy — with some important reservations. The process of shifting
society’s reaction against anti-social behaviour from, say, the field of
penal to that of administrative reaction requires the utmost caution
and subtle discrimination, and it should be limited to cases where the
advantages of administrative over criminal proceedings can be clearly
seen and understood by the public at large. The changeover has to be
in the interest of society as a whole, not merely of certain classes, and
it may have to be confined to certain sections of the social problem
involved. Not enough thought has so far been given to the techni-
calities of the matter for which a satisfactory solution can be found
not by wholesale regulation but only by careful examination of each
legislative problem separately. One of the major points here to be con-
sidered is that within each category of public welfare offences contra-
ventions of very diverse types and degrees of gravity are likely to exist
which may make differential treatment necessary. For some of the less
serious types the requirement of mens rea might safely be relaxed and
administrative action be preferable to penal sanctions ; for others such
changes might be intolerable. All this applies to many WC offences as
much as to other public welfare offences, not however to those forms
of WCC which are not covered by the latter term, such as ordinary
business frauds, which have to be treated in the same way as other
frauds even if committed by members of the higher social classes.

( b ) While Sutherland went too far in restricting the scope of WCC
to the anti-social conduct of corporations, it has already been stressed
that the latter do play an extremely important role in this field. The
legal treatment of WCC is, therefore, largely dependent on a satis-

482

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY III

factory solution of that very old problem, the criminal liability of
corporations. 25 It is true, the criminal law can do very little to assist
in the attempts to overcome the economic and social difficulties which
constantly arise in this field, but even such modest contributions as it
has so far been able to make are not entirely without significance.

Corporations differ from individuals, for whom the criminal law
has, by tradition, been primarily intended, in that they have neither
a physical body on which the pain of punishment could be inflicted
nor a mind which can be guilty of a criminal intent. Both of these two
deficiencies can, however, to some extent be overcome. Those who
used to stress the obvious truth that corporations cannot be hanged,
flogged or imprisoned, have had to concede that corporations are not
insensitive to heavy fines and to loss of face. As W. Friedmann and
Glanville Williams have rightly stressed, the latter, i.e. the diminution
of respectability, the stigma, is the real penalty of a corporation, and
this factor provides one of the weightiest arguments in favour of
punishing not, or not only, the director or manager who has acted for
it but also the corporation itself. ‘The offence should be linked in the
public mind with the name of the company, and not merely with the
name of directors or managers who may be nonentities’ (Williams,
§ 221). From this Williams draws, however, the conclusion that only
a declaratory judgment is justified against the corporation, not a fine
which would penalize the shareholders who are not responsible for
the crime. His objections are important, but not really decisive, for
two reasons: First, if the real punishment lies in the stigma, the share-
holders are not punished since the stigma does not extend to them,
and the financial loss resulting from a heavy fine has to be borne by
them in the same way as they have to bear other financial losses due
to bad management. It often happens that the penalties imposed on
an offender injure other persons, especially his family, more than him-
self; the innocent wife and children have to suffer when the bread-
winner goes to prison. Why should shareholders be privileged? Sec-
ondly, a mere declaratory judgment condemning the conduct of a
corporation would fail to convey to the general public the gravity of
the offence and the degree of the condemnation which it deserves in
the opinion of the court. The man in the street usually assesses the
gravity of a crime mainly according to the length of imprisonment or
the amount of the fine imposed, and this essential yardstick would be
missing in a merely declaratory judgment. The social function of
punishment, therefore, requires something more than a mere declara-
tion of guilt. Where an offence cannot be punished by a fine no
penalty can of course be imposed, but apart from serious crimes
against the person, such as murder or rape, of which a corporation
cannot be guilty anyway, such offences are now very rare, and

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

it is always possible for the legislator to provide for a fine as an
alternative.

Having accepted the legal principle of bringing the corporation as
such within the competence of the criminal law we now have to ex-
amine, first, for whose actions the corporation should be made crimin-
ally responsible and, secondly, whether the persons acting for it
should be punished. The answer to the first question is to be found in
the so-called alter ego doctrine, according to which a corporation is
responsible for the activities of its organs, i.e. of those who are in con-
trol of its business affairs, managing directors and similar high execu-
tives. It is for the court to draw the line in each individual case. 20 The
second question has been answered in different ways by the various
Statutes concerned. From the detailed analysis given by Glanville
Williams (§ 222) it appears that the English legislator employs one of
the following two main solutions: either the directors, managers,
secretaries or other officers with whose consent or connivance the
offence has been committed are held co-responsible together with the
corporation, but the burden of proving their guilt falls on the prosecu-
tion. Or this burden is shifted to the person concerned who has to
prove his innocence — a form of legislation greatly disliked in the
world of business. As Friedmann writes, the actual decision whether
to impose criminal liability in a given case on an individual acting for
the corporation must ‘in large measure depend on the wisdom, and
the sense of practical realities, of the court’.

V. CASE MATERIAL ON WCC

The existing case material on WCC, while not particularly extensive,
is not as limited as Sutherland thought twenty years ago. A number of
recent court cases, especially in the United States and Britain, with
the public discussions arising from them, have in fact greatly con-
tributed to our understanding of this category of offences. We can
here deal only with the most significant types and the most flagrant of
individual cases. They show, however, that there is no reason to re-
strict our examination, as some recent writers have suggested (see
above), to anti-trust law violations and similar offences, although they
form no doubt one of the most important groups.

A particularly valuable contribution to some of the problems dis-
cussed in the present chapter and the previous one lias recently been
presented in the September 1962 issue of The Annals of the American
Academy of Political and Social Science (Vol. 343), devoted to ‘The
Ethics of Business Enterprise’. Although it is mainly concerned with
the ethical rather than the legal aspects of the matter, the latter are by
no means neglected, and the shadow of the ‘Philadelphia Electrical

484

, OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY III

Equipment Cases’ (see below, s. (b)) is visible in a number of contribu-
tions. While the contributors and their material are, without excep-
tion, American their conclusions are of general interest.

Very significantly, the symposium opens with a quotation from an
article by Peter F. Drucker in the Harvard Business Review of March-
April 1962:

There is evolving a new concept of the role of the big-business enterprise
in our society. ‘Big business’ is ‘private’ and accepted as such — in the sense
in which a big university is ‘private’ — But it is not a ‘private affair’ and
the concern only of its stockholders, executives and employees. In the
pursuit of its everyday ‘private business’, and in performing its economic
job, big business is therefore expected to further human values, and to
serve national purpose. This ... is at the core of big-business ethics.

To which the editor of the issue, Arthur S . Miller, Professor of Law,
George Washington University, Washington, D.C., adds:

In other words, the ethical question of business enterprise is not so much
that of the personal peccadilloes of a few errant businessmen. It is the
larger matter of the relationships that the dominating corporations have
with other segments of the nation ... It is the social obligation of the
corporate giant that is the subject of scrutiny in this symposium. (Pp. 9-10.)

True as it is that we are concerned with the general picture, with the
problem as a whole rather than with certain more obvious and possibly
exceptional malpractices, it is equally true that the general picture
provides the background, the atmosphere, against which these mal-
practices have to be seen and judged. As another contributor points
out (p. 2), ‘profit maximization’ is no longer universally regarded as
the only goal of the large corporation, but it is much less obvious
what could take the place of this greatly over-simplified concept, bear-
ing in mind that a corporation consists of so many different people
with different roles and interests. And, as a third contributor asks,
‘what is a businessman’s moral duty when there is real uncertainty
whether a contemplated action will be held legal or illegal?’ (p. 33).
A great deal of heart-searching may have been going on in recent
years within the large firms, but the results of this process are summed
up in one of these essays as ‘too little, too late and too superficial,
directed at the wrong objects’ and not leading to ‘an exercise of re-
sponsibility commensurate with the size and importance of the
modern corporation’ (p. 67).

Let us now turn to a few matters of detail.

(a) WCC Connected with 1 Take-over Bids'

A take-over’ has been defined by a legal journal as ‘merely a technical
procedure by which the control of a company passes from one group

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

of shareholders to another, with or without amalgamation of the
acquiring and the acquired company. A take-over which may assume
many legal forms is an entirely neutral procedure; it is neither in-
trinsically “good” nor “bad”.’ 27 However, as the same journal admits,
the technique of take-over bids, this ‘legitimate instrument of business
activity’, is liable to very serious abuses unless certain precautionary
measures are strictly observed. For example, the shareholders to whom
a bid is made should be informed ‘adequately and independently’ of
the true value of their shares and should be consulted before the
decision. Moreover, attention is drawn in the same journal to ‘a type
of take-over bid which is rarely justifiable and often pernicious’, i.e.
the one ‘intended to be financed out of the assets of the company
which the bidder wants to take over’. The attempt of the Companies
Act, 1948, s. 54, to cope with such abuses by making it unlawful for a
company to give financial assistance f or the purchase of its own shares,
is described as ‘wholly inadequate’ and easily evaded. An interesting
debate took place in the House of Commons on the 29th June 1 959 on
a motion of Labour M.P.s:

that this House, in view of undesirable developments in private industry,
including take-over bids, excessive speculation, in share and property
values and practices designed to avoid taxes, calls upon Her Majesty’s
Government to take steps to prevent these and other abuses and to ensure
that private industry is carried on in accordance with the national interest.
( Hansard , 29.6.1959, cols. 34-163.)

The motion was lost, with 254 votes for and 316 against, but the
debate produced some valuable material on, among other points, our
subject of take-over bids. In spite of fundamental differences in out-
look, members of both the Government and the Opposition agreed
that ‘it would be wrong to condemn all take-over bids out of hand’.
Labour spokesmen were willing to admit that ‘If we accept, as we do,
the continuance of a substantial private sector, we must accept that
there is a case for greater industrial concentration, whether by private
negotiations or under mechanisms of take-over bidding’, provided
the result of the latter was greater efficiency and not merely a quick
and tax-free profit by the bidder who has no other interest in the fate
of the company to be taken over (cols, 37-8, 84, 130, 147 ). ‘Take-over
bids are not made to secure the stability of British industry, but to
create values on the Stock Exchange and force up share values . . .’
(col. 110). One particular, unsuccessful, bid was said to have in-
creased by over £9 million the value of the shares of the company for
which the bid was made (col. 122) and to have brought a profit of
£500,000 to the unsuccessful bidder (col. 39). Reference was also made
to a ‘new technique . . . spiv bidding’, which means that shares are

486

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY III

bought and the rumour is spread that a take-over bid is imminent,
with the result that the share values are pushed up although no such
bid is intended (col. 147). Although many of these charges were dis-
puted by Conservative M.P.s, at least one of them, with a special
knowledge of problems of modern industry, admitted that ‘sometimes
there is an anti-social tendency in private enterprise’ (col. 84). No
doubt, abuses of the kind mentioned in that debate are not very fre-
quent, but those which do occur are usually not brought before a
court or other competent tribunal, and those few which lead to
criminal proceedings present, in all probability, only a tiny fraction
of those which actually happen and contain certain violations of the
criminal law. The dark figure is here, as always, not ascertainable, but
it may be very high. Those who regard this statement as mere specula-
tion should bear in mind that similar speculations are frequently made
with regard to other types of offences without provoking indignant
protests.

This is the background which has to be borne in mind if we wish to
understand the full significance of the sensational trial of Friedrich
Grunwald and Herbert Hugh Murray, which was held at the Central
Criminal Court in London on 28 days in June and July 1960 —
apparently one of the longest and most complicated trials in the sphere
of commercial fraud ever held before an English court. 28 ‘When I
started to work out my summing-up I almost despaired of getting it
into a simple form easily understood,’ the presiding judge told the
jury. Both Grunwald and Murray were found guilty of ‘fraudulently
converting to their own use and benefit proceeds of 32 cheques worth
£3,255,500 received for or on account of the State Building Society’
and of other similar offences, and each of them was sentenced to five
years’ imprisonment. What, in a nutshell, were the essential facts of
this case?

Murray, aged 67, was managing director and secretary of the State Build-
ing Society in London; Grunwald, aged 34, was a solicitor acting for that
rwww! aiK * a * S0 a corn P an y director. Murray’s salary was stated to be
6,000, and a few years before the trial he had been President of the
faculty of Architects and Surveyors (The Times, 16.6.1960). The essence of
a gamst them was that, after having used the moneys of the
a e Building Society to finance various take-over bids and acquire the
ompames concerned for themselves, they had tried to use the same tech-
ique in order to take over the Lintang Investments Ltd., which, besides
hi 1C [. owne d the shares of Dolphin Square, one of the largest

tn°R» S ° ln London. The sum required for this operation was stated
, a PFoximately £7m. or 8m., of which Grunwald obtained from the
n -Kn Societ y> through the good offices of Murray, about

oh ’ ; . s %vas > as they knew, against the rules of the Society, whose

J vas to provide a safe and secure investment for the small man’ ( The

487

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

Times, 9.7.1960), and it was especially reprehensible as the Society received
no security whatsoever for the large sum lent to finance the Murray-
Grunwald take-over ( The Times, 8.7.1960). As the remaining sum required
could not be obtained, the whole transaction broke down, and the money
lent by the Society was, at least temporarily, lost. 28 One of the defences put
up by the accused Grunwald was that he had hoped the shares of Lintang
would, as the result of the take-over, go up, and he would have no difficulty
in repaying the ‘loan’; he also maintained that, in spite of his legal training,
he had not known that the funds of a Building Society could not lawfully
be used for loans to finance risky take-over bids without any security. If the
deal had been successful, both Murray and Grunwald would have made
very big profits for themselves through the expected rise of the Lintang
shares. As it was, Grunwald was accused by one of counsel acting in the
case of having been driven to his reckless manipulations by folie cie
grandeur, to have been ‘intoxicated with success’ and to have felt nothing
would be too much for him (The Times, 8.7.1960) — which again reminds us
of Ibsen’s John Gabriel Borkman. Apart from this we have on the personal
side only the information supplied by Grunwald himself for a series of
articles on ‘Grunwald — Take-over King’ in the News of the World (begin-
ning 31st July 1960). After his release from prison — if not before — we shall
no doubt get his memoirs which may shed more light on his state of mind.
On that of Murray we have no information beyond a few interesting re-
marks in the Faulks Report (see Note 28) which try briefly to sum up these
two men (p. 4):

‘Mr. Murray is a valuer of property whose astuteness is quite remarkable.
He was elderly, unscrupulous and rich: Mr. Grunwald was and is an
extremely astute lawyer, who was young, unscrupulous and poor . . . Both
Mr. Murray and Mr. Grunwald were greedy for money, although it may
be said on Mr. Grunwald’s behalf that he used a large part of his moneys
improperly obtained for charitable purposes . . . and when in difficulty
over Lintang called on “my wife’s last £55,000”.’

This case shows all the typical features of a WCC. The offenders
were persons apparently regarded as highly respectable and of con-
siderable influence in the business circles in which they moved, and
they regarded themselves not as ‘criminals’ but only as ‘unlucky’.
While Murray professed to have been completely ignorant of the use
made of the money by Grunwald, the latter used the well-worn
rationalization that he had merely ‘borrowed’ it with Murray’s con-
sent to repay it after the successful completion of the take-over bid.

It will also be observed that, once the external and internal facts of
the offence had been proved there were no legal difficulties in finding
the accused guilty of fraudulent conversion (Larceny Act, 1916, s. 20).

Many further details concerning the transactions leading to the
Grunwald-Murray trial are given in the report made into the affairs
of H. Jasper and Co. Ltd., by Mr. Neville Faulks, Q.C., for the Board
of Trade. This report made it clear, for example, that breaches of s.54

488

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY HI

of the Companies Act, 1948 (see above) were regarded by many take-
over bidders and even by their banks as merely technical offences
which would not invalidate the transactions concerned, and unless
the breaches were too flagrant to be ignored the banks were willing to
connive at them. Mr. Faulks recommended a steep increase in the
maximum penalty of £100 (!) which had led to a state of affairs where
s. 54 was honoured more in the breach than in the observance (pp. 6-7,
17).

As pictured in the Faulks Report we see on the stage, in addition
to the two principal actors, a number of other figures, some of them
engaged in a mad scramble for extravagant profits to be gained
through ‘business’ activities of no conceivable social value or even
clearly anti-social. It was only a matter of chance that Grunwald and
Murray were finally caught in one of the traps they had so cleverly
set, and it was also nothing but chance that only these two were caught
and punished for doing what, in divers forms, apparently others had
also been doing with excessive profits for themselves and harm to
society at large.

(b) Monopolistic and Other Restrictive Practices

Between take-over bids and monopolistic practices there is, obviously,
a close connection, but they may be regarded as two overlapping
circles rather than as identical. Take-over bids, if successful, may or
may not produce a monopoly in the branch of trade or industry con-
cerned; in the Grunwald-Murray case it was unlikely that the opera-
tion would have created a monopolistic domination of the London
property market, whereas anl.C.I.-CourtauIds merger would have led
to a 96 per cent monopoly in synthetic fibres {Hansard, 16.2.1962).
Anxiety was also expressed in the press and in Parliament regarding
the proposed merger between Odhams Press and Thomson News-
papers and certain activities in the boot and shoe and tobacco trades
{Hansard, 14.2.1962).

In the present writer’s Criminal Justice and Social Reconstruction
(pp. 152-73) an analysis of the problems of monopolies was made for
the time up to the end of the last war from the point of view of the
sociology and reform of the criminal law. This story has been brought
up-to-date by Sir David Cairns, Professor John C. Spencer, Sir Henry
Clay, Laisley P . Wragg et al?° Their writings have been supplemented
uy various Government Reports, such as that of 1955 on Collective
^crimination. 31 Although the latter, in a majority opinion, recom-
rnended legislation to create a new criminal offence to deal with cer-
am monopolistic tendencies (p. 86), this has so far not been imple-
mented, and altogether, in the words of Spencer, ‘Great Britain has

489

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

moved away from the use of criminal sanctions as a means of control
of restrictive practices.’ Nothing that has occurred in the past twenty
years has convinced the present writer that he was wrong in allocating
to the criminal law a modest, but nevertheless essential, role in this
field, provided certain important conditions were fulfilled (see esp.
pp. 169 ff.). The various attempts of the Government to cope with
the matter without recourse to penal sanctions have apparently proved
ineffective. The measures provided by the Monopolies and Restric-
tive Practices (Inquiry and Control) Act, 1948, i.e. setting up a ‘Com-
mission’ with no real authority, and in particular by the Restrictive
Trade Practices Act, 1956, i.e. establishing a ‘Restrictive Practices
Court’, have, up to a point, been useful (see Cairns) in fighting such
practices as were found to be against the ‘public interest’, and The
Times (1.2.1961), reviewing the first annual report on the work of the
new Court, thought it had been working ‘at an almost breathless
pace’. Nevertheless, there have been rather critical assessments, too
(see, for example, Wragg, loc. cit.), and it was not without significance
that in spite of the existence of the Commission and the Court in
spring 1962 a group of about 50 Conservative backbenchers ‘opened
what promises to be a determined campaign to persuade the Govern-
ment to act against monopolies’ : it was feared that ‘the party image
has been damaged by the failure to act against monopolistic tend-
encies’ {The Times, 31.5.1962). It is only now (March 1965) that the
Labour Government has introduced a ‘Monopolies and Mergers
Bill’.

The picture is different in the United States, where after, a long
period of comparative inactivity the penal provisions of the Sherman
Act of 1890 have been vigorously enforced in the now famous Phila-
delphia Electrical Equipment cases of 1961. Already in 1959 ‘more
anti-trust cases (sixty-three) were filed than at any time since 1943’
(Spencer). The following brief analysis of the Philadelphia cases is
based on the accounts given in the Annals of the American Academy
of Political and Social Science (esp. pp. 77 ff.), and by Geis, Spencer
(see Note 1) and Fortas. 32

Twenty-nine corporations, including some of the biggest American
firms such as the General Electric Company and the Westinghouse
Electric Corporation, and forty-six individuals were convicted of violating
§ 1 of the Sherman Act by fixing prices on various types of electrical
equipment. All defendants pleaded eventually guilty or nolo contendere.
Fines totalling nearly two million dollars were imposed and prison
sentences were passed on thirty individual defendants, of whom seven had
to serve 30 days each, whereas in the cases of the others the sentences were
suspended. In addition, there came ‘a deluge of private treble damage
actions’ (Fortas) ; the Federal Government itself, as a large-scale purchaser

490

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY III

of the heavy electric equipment concerned, and the Tennessee Valley
Authority settled their damage claims against one of the defendant firms
for a sum of seven and a half million dollars, and it was estimated that the
damages to be paid to the victims might altogether amount to 500 million
dollars (Fortas). 33 ‘American public opinion’, wrote the correspondent of
The Times (21.2.1961), ‘is exercised about the implications of what President
Kennedy has called “the effort made by large electrical companies to
defraud the Government”,’ and the Judge said: ‘The conduct of the
corporate and individual defendants alike . . . has flagrantly mocked the
image of that economic system of free enterprise which we profess, and has
destroyed the model which we offer today as a free-world alternative to
state control and eventual dictatorship’ ( The Times).

Apart from its economic and political implications the Philadelphia
case is interesting for the following reasons:

(, aa ) This is said to be the first time that high-ranking representa-
tives of the U.S.A. big business have actually served prison sentences
for anti-trust law violations (Fortas, p. 31).

( bb ) The proceedings are believed to have demonstrated convinc-
ingly the bad faith of those convicted, i.e. they were fully aware of the
illegal and criminal character of their activities. As Fortas writes:

Forty-five executives of the leading electrical companies met for a period
of many years in plush resorts and motor hotels to eliminate competition
among them, to split up the electrical equipment business in proportion to
the size of each company, to eliminate ‘outsiders’, to engage in contrived
and fictitious ‘bidding’ and to ‘maintain’ prices. To avoid detection, they
used public telephones rather than their office equipment. They used only
blank stationery and omitted names . . . they used code numbers to refer
to the members of the team. They never gathered together in public dining
rooms or hotels lobbies — Expense accounts were often altered to hide
the location of the meetings . . .

Surely, these are tactics almost reminiscent of those of professional
criminals. As Geis (pp. 166-7) has shown on the strength of his analy-
sis of the Hearings of the Senate Subcommittee on Anti-trust and
Monopoly, these offenders did regard themselves as law violators both
before and after their convictions; their ‘self-image was as “criminal-
istic” as that of amateur shoplifters’ (Geis).

(cc) An important feature of the proceedings is that, although the
presidents of a few smaller companies and five vice-presidents of two
of the largest of them were indicted in addition to the slightly less pro-
minent officials, the Government did not charge any members of the
top management, the ‘highest echelons’ of the corporations involved.
The trial judge commented, however, that the latter, too, bore a grave
responsibility as it would be ‘most naive indeed’ to believe that such
persistent violations of the law could have remained unknown to

491

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

them. Senator Kefauver, the Chairman of the Senate Committee in-
vestigating the case, took the same view ( Annals , pp. 78-9), and some
of the witnesses had testified under oath that the top management had
not only known of these activities but had actually ordered them to be
carried out.

( dd ) Some of the offending corporations were ‘recidivists’ ; they had
often been involved in anti-trust litigation and had in fact issued writ-
ten orders to their employees strictly to avoid anti-trust law viola-
tions, but their subordinates felt that this was not to be taken seriously
and the general maxim was ‘Don’t tell the lawyers’ ( Annals , pp. 79-80).

( ec ) The heavy treble damages payable as a side-effect of the
criminal case might, as Fortas points out, so greatly weaken the
smaller firms as to eliminate them as competitors, while the largest
firms are likely to survive; in consequence, competition, which the
prosecution had intended to revive, may well suffer through the case:
‘Anti-trust is not without its paradox.’ However, against this it might
be argued that it was not so much the criminal case but the treble
damages that had this effect.

( ff ) As far as ‘public opinion’ was concerned it seemed to have
been overwhelmingly on the side of the Government, and ‘on the
whole, business opinion condemned the guilty’ ( Amials , p. 116). This
contradicts Void’s contention that penal anti-trust legislation cannot
beenforced because it lacksthe support of public opinion (above. III).
If it can be convincingly shown to the man in the street that certain
big business practices are against his interests he will back even strong
legal action.

(c) Tax Frauds

Tax defraudations are not necessarily WCC; they are often com-
mitted by working-class people and small traders. PAYE makes it
more difficult for some of them, but it does not affect their part-time
earnings and similar forms of income which are never brought to the
notice of the tax inspector. Even so, most really serious tax evasions
are committed by offenders who fall under the category of WCC.

In Criminal Justice and Social Reconstruction (pp. 145-52) the posi-
tion up to 1945 and the difficulties arising from the distinction be-
tween illegal tax evasion and lawful, though often immoral and anti-
social, tax avoidance were briefly discussed. In the present context we
are not concerned with the innumerable legal niceties of the subject
which have been engaging the attention of successive Chancellors of
the Exchequer year after year when faced with the well-nigh impossible
task of devising in the annual Finance Act a general formula to reduce
to a tolerable minimum the scope of anti-social tax avoidance. The

492

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY III

trend of recent legislation has been to cover as many of these anti-
social activities as can be done without arousing too strong opposition
on the part of the business world. The crux of the problem lies in the
almost limitless and undefinable concept of ‘avoidance’. As a corres-
pondent wrote in The Times (16.4.1960), the man who cuts down his
cigarette smoking because of the tax increase commits an act of ‘tax
avoidance’ as much as the millionaire who disposes of his estate ‘law-
fully’ in order to escape the death duties. In an instructive article in
The Times (12.4.1960), a tax law specialist, Professor G. S. A. Wheat-
croft, points out that against two of the most notorious devices, bond
washing and dividend stripping, the British legislator has been fight-
ing for years with very little success : ‘as fast as one loophole has been
stopped another has been found and used. The existence of high tax-
payers side by side with tax exempt bodies, with dealers and tax loss
companies near at hand, enables innumerable favourable tax situa-
tions to be created which are indistinguishable by legislation from
genuine business transactions.’ Wheatcroft indicates various ways of
how the legislator might possibly cope with these and other acts of
tax avoidance. One of them is to introduce retrospective legislation
at frequent intervals between Budgets, a technique which would be
effective but is politically hardly feasible because of ‘the natural anti-
pathy of most citizens to retrospective legislation’.

In the financial year 1959-60, investigations into fraud and evasion
of taxes brought to light 13,734 cases involving over £19 million ( The
Times , 30.11.1960, quoting from Revenue Departments, Appropria-
tion Accounts, H.M.S.O., 1959-60). High as these figures may seem,
they are in fact insignificant considering the real scope of tax evasion.
As a responsible and knowledgeable financial writer, Andrew Shon-
field, then Economic Editor of the Observer, has pointed out ( Obser-
ver , 27.3.1960), according to statistics compiled from the tax returns
for 1957-58, T 1 5,000 incorporated businesses engaged in trade earned
less than £250 a year. . . . The average “net true income” per company
in this group was £31.’ Shonfield comments drily that ‘on the face of
it a lot of people arc going to a lot of trouble in order to earn extra-
ordinarily little money’. As far as individual businessmen are con-
cerned, nearly 500,000 of them had a ‘net true income’ of less than
£250 a year, and another 484,000 had incomes of between £250 and
£500 a year. Shonfield quotes from an article by an official of the In-
land Revenue Staff Federation : ‘Is it really the case that nearly a mil-
lion go-ahead self-employed people remain satisfied every year . . .
with less than a railway porter or an agricultural worker can earn?
. . . For my part I remain convinced that there is substantial evasion
of income tax.’

Discussing the various techniques by which ‘the rich can arrange to

493

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

shift their resources between wealth and income over a period of
years and between various members of the same family’, Professor
Titmuss concludes that it is a fallacy to think that there has been a
trend to greater equality of income in post-war Britain. 34

For West Germany, Terstegen states that a ten-year’s collection of
cases has supplied ample evidence for the existence of tax-evasions in
all classes of WCC (Note 1 above, p. 86).

(d) Other Forms of WCC

In addition to the three types of WCC so far discussed there is a great
variety of other forms, too diversified to be covered here in toto. In
fact, every day cases of WCC are reported in the press with the same
regularity as bank robberies and pay bag snatches. Obviously, the
so-called ‘Shoddy Goods Inquiry’ ( The Times, 19.1.1960), which pro-
duced the Molony Report, originated in the widespread feeling that
in many branches of industry and trade customers were induced by
dishonest methods to pay ‘inflated prices for inferior articles and also
to buy goods which they neither wanted nor needed’. The notion of
‘built-in obsolescence’, i.e. the business practice of systematically pro-
ducing goods of inferior quality which have to be replaced much more
quickly than would be needed if the goods would be satisfactory, is
characteristic of the whole matter (see The Times, 11.2.1963). In his
book The Waste Makers 35 Vance Packard has produced overwhelm-
ing masses of American material on this and similar abuses. A corres-
ponding British investigation might be worth while; it would hardly
suffer from lack of evidence. The Molony Report accepted the wide-
spread view that the Merchandise Acts had not been adequately
enforced and that the number of prosecutions undertaken bore no
relation to the number of offences committed.

Offences connected with hire-purchase transactions 30 are to a large
extent not WCC, i.e. when committed by purchasers of small means
who, when in financial straits, unlawfully dispose of the goods before
the full price has been paid. The extent of hire-purchase sales depends
largely on the often changing laws regulating the size of the deposit
to be paid; for example, they were said to have risen from £760m. in
1957 to £l,070m. in 1959 ( The Times, 24.2.1960), Failure to keep up
instalment payments depends greatly on the fluctuations of the labour
market. The finance companies operating mainly, but not exclusively,
in the car hire-purchase field have also been occasionally blamed for
facilitating such offences by giving excessive h.p. credit to untrust-
worthy people without adequate enquiries (see also Spencer’s study
mentioned below). In cases before the Birmingham magistrates, for
example, it was claimed that ‘an organized ring in Birmingham had

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY III

obtained more than £4,000 worth of goods on hire purchase and had
sold them’ (The Times, 30.11.1960). The Sunday Express (15.11.1959)
reported that police and finance companies were fighting ‘a wave of
hire-purchase frauds involving millions of pounds’, that there were
markets in fraudulent sales of TV sets and radios, and that one finance
company had lost £250,000 through such frauds. How far any of these
offences were WCC is impossible to say because of lack of detailed
information. No such doubts can exist with regard to certain ‘car
hire’ or ‘contract hire’ arrangements, allegedly used by a few hire pur-
chase finance companies, which were in fact disguised hire purchase
agreements framed in this way in order to avoid the legal require-
ments regarding minimum deposits, etc. ‘No deposit — you pay only
three months’ rental in advance. ... A new car every one or two
years’ — it is stated in one of these advertisements, and the Finance
Houses Association had to issue a warning that anyone participating
in such agreements might be prosecuted (The Times, 2.6.1960).

In the American television quiz cases, as far as they involved
breaches of the criminal law, those participants who admittedly had
been coached for the notorious ‘ $64,000 Question’ before each show
had not acted within their normal occupations. The organizers of
these quiz programmes, however, did act in their professional capa-
city. It was even alleged that some producers had tried to persuade
contestants to give perjured testimony to a grand jury. How far other
offences were involved under existing American law is not quite clear;
efforts were made, however, to make it a criminal offence ‘with intent
to deceive the public to engage in “rigged” television contests’ (The
Times, 3, 4, 5.11.1959, 8.2.1960).

Bribery and corruption are often WCC. In 1962, a former Aider-
man was committed for trial on the charge that, being a member of
the Staffordshire County Council, he had corruptly received £3,400
in 15 months for supplying information to a building company about
planning applications (The Times, 31 .10 and 1.1 1 .1962). The American
case of Goldfine, the Boston business man, and Sherman Adams, for-
mer Governor of New Hampshire and one-time right-hand man of
President Eisenhower, is interesting because of its political reper-
cussions. As Adams has convincingly shown in his book First-hand
Report, on Ills part nothing more had occurred than ‘mistakes of
judgment not of intent’, but the line between such mere mistakes and
the offence of passive briber)' is often a very delicate one to draw with
certainty, and because of this Adams had to resign from his office. 37

A former Sheriff of the City of London was fined a total of £20,000
at Bow Street Magistrates’ Court for offences against the Exchange
Control Act, 1947 (27ie Times, 17.3.1960). The Principal of a College
of Further Education, ‘a man said to be held in the highest repute

495

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

everywhere’, was sentenced to nine months’ imprisonment on six
charges of embezzlement, some of which involved tuition fees {The
Times , 1.11.1962). A ‘wealthy property owner whose companies con-
trolled premises worth £3 million’ was fined £25,000 at the Central
Criminal Court after pleading guilty to living wholly or in part on the
earnings of prostitution in respect of premises in Soho between 1959
and 1961. He had charged rents of £20 per week from prostitutes,
stated to be far in excess of the ordinary residential rents {The Times,
12.10.1962). This list could be continued ad infinitum since similar
cases of WCC are reported almost daily in the press.

Further valuable material from English sources, particularly inter-
esting on account of the data given on individual personalities, has
been presented by John C. Spencer (Note 1 above). Only a few of the
facts collected in this pioneer study can here be reproduced.

Spencer collected the cases of 30 prisoners from the open prison at Ley-
hill in Gloucestershire; his criterion of WCC was, in accordance with
Sutherland’s definition, ‘an offence committed by a person of high status in
the course of his occupation’, and, considering the classification system
used at the time in the English prison administration, it was obvious that
such persons if at all sent to prison could be found mainly in Leyhill. The
offences were mostly fraud in its various forms, but persons who ‘deliber-
ately set out to make money by fraud’ were excluded. Twenty-four of the
thirty men were personally interviewed, some of them twice, and as far as
circumstances permitted an attempt was made to study their personalities,
in particular in relation to their capacity ‘to handle the conflict of norms
presented by membership in different social groups’. In spite of the criterion
‘persons of high social status’ the prisoners came in fact from a hetero-
geneous group of occupations and very different social backgrounds. They
were predominantly middle-aged or elderly, and judging by previous con-
victions they were latecomers to crime. Their sentences ranged from 3 to
8 years. From their occupational records it became clear that ‘no sample
of top businessmen from large corporations would be available at Ley-
hill’, although it might perhaps contain some of their ‘lesser followers’ (it
has to be remembered that this investigation was carried out before Murray
and Grunwald were sent to prison). On the Hall-Jones occupational scale 38
the sample could be classified under the three highest classes as Class 1:
6 men; Class 2:13 men; Class 3:11 men. A great deal of upward mobility
was discovered: whereas their fathers belonged mainly to Classes 4 and 5,
many of the sons had worked their way up from skilled manual workers to
important positions, but there were among them no executives of well-
known firms. Only two had been to a university. Spencer comments that
he had expected to find many more men in leading positions and with
superior social and educational backgrounds. We may have to seek the
explanation to some extent in the tendency to exclude monopolistic and
similarly large-scale anti-social activities from the scope of English
criminal law. Marital relationships seemed to be reasonably stable, in con-

496

OUR CRIMINOGENIC SOCIETY III

trast to those of most habitual offenders. There was a noticeable contrast
in temperaments between the offenders and their non-criminal brothers
whom they regarded as less ambitious and ruthless, stabler, and less willing
to take risks. Even so, the adventurous and ruthless gambler type was not
typical of this group of men; they amounted to no more than about one-
third of the sample, and there was an equally large group of mere muddlers
and drifters. There was a striking conflict of norms of behaviour apparent
in the behaviour of the prisoners; several of them referred to their ‘two
lives’, one set of norms ruling their business activities, the other their
private existence, in particular within their families. To some of them such
conflicts caused intense strain and feelings of guilt, while others tried to
solve them extra-punitively by blaming the authorities for their conviction
and sentence. All of them, however, rationalized their conduct, mostly by
pointing out that everybody behaved as they had done. Professional men
seemed to show stronger feelings of guilt than business men, perhaps
because of the disciplinary trials which meant to them exclusion from their
profession. Spencer stresses the prevalence of bankruptcy in his sample and
urges a criminological study of this phenomenon. He also criticizes the
absence of adequate public control over the activities of hire-purchase
finance corporations and over dealings in property and real estate — two
types of business which accounted for nearly half of his cases. He supports
the view that the criminal law should be more closely related to administra-
tive methods of business control and that for certain forms of anti-social
behaviour ‘neither internal regulation alone nor government control unsup-
ported by criminal sanctions is enough. The proper decision as to the
appropriate method of control can only be made on a foundation of social
research.’

In the Soviet Union, with its entirely different social and legal sys-
tems, the concept of WCC must inevitably be on lines quite different
from those used in non-communist countries. While in the latter an
important aspect of WCC is, for example, to be found in the mono-
polistic and anti-competitive character of free enterprise, competition
and free enterprise, even the very possibility of setting up in private
business, are almost non-existent in Soviet Russia. The Russian white
collar criminals are not those who try to restrict free competition but
those who try to compete with the economic activities of the mono-
polistic state. As Beermann writes, 39 ‘the bottlenecks which still exist
in the supply of some consumer goods, tools and raw materials are a
constant inducement to act as manufacturer, distributor or purveyor
by illicit means’. As the collective farmers and others who produce
surplus food can legally sell them only at artificially reduced prices,
black markets are bound to flourish. Moreover, there are frequent
reports in the press of ‘underground capitalism’ and ilh'cit factories.
Those who operate them and their auxiliaries are the Soviet white
collar criminals, and the so-called ‘Parasite Law’ of May 1961
represents the latest effort of the Government to deal with them.

cen-o 497

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

Beermann traces the history of this piece of legislation back to 1957
and shows that in recent years the types of offenders against whom
the parasite laws have been directed have changed: while previously
the law had been concerned mainly with the tramp, beggar, and other
workshy elements of low calibre, the Act of 1961 is mainly aimed at
the more prosperous categories, those ‘who are exploring the new
regions of freedom’ of the post-Stalin era. Against these entrepreneurs
proceedings may be taken under the Parasite Law even if there is not
sufficient evidence for criminal proceedings. Evidence of ‘conspicuous
consumption’ unexplained by lawful means and earnings would be
enough, and according to Beermann reports in the Russian press and
legal periodicals indicate that prosecutions under the Parasite Law
for extensive speculations in currency and goods, for illicit trading
and underground manufacturing may have led to the detection of
criminal offences, such as bribery and large-scale embezzlement of
State property. It is as if in this country in the Yassall spy case of 1962
proceedings opened merely on account of Vassall’s ‘conspicuous con-
sumption’ such as living in an expensive flat in spite of a very low
salary would have led to the disclosure of his treasonable activities. The
legal safeguards essential to criminal procedure are circumvented by
the simple device of calling parasite proceedings mere administrative
measures — a device reminding us of similarly doubtful manipulations
used in the earlier American sexual psychopath legislation. According
to Beermann the parasite legislation does not, however, as those
American statutes did, even require the courts to explore the personal
circumstances of the offender.

In a subsequent article Beermann traces ‘The Further Development
of the Anti-Parasite Laws’ (Brit. J. Crim., Vol. 5, No. 2, April 1965).

498

Chapter 22

CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES OF CRIMINAL
SOCIOLOGY. IN PARTICULAR: ANOMIE
AND THE CRIMINAL SUBCULTURE

After sketching the sociological and potentially criminogenic back-
ground of a class-dominated society and presenting some of the
material which shows the significance' of class differences in crime,
especially with reference to the phenomenon of white collar crime, we
can now pass on to the discussion of a variety of socio-criminological
theories to examine how far they reflect the class factor in crime.

It is not our ambition in this chapter and the following to deal with
the total body of socio-criminological theories — there have been too
many of them in recent decades, each of them claiming to be original
and stressing the differences from its predecessors rather than the
similarities, whereas the actual differences are often too slight to
justify the space and publicity so readily offered to them. On the other
hand, some of the theories here to be discussed have greatly enriched
our understanding and even fundamentally changed our views of the
sociological and socio-psychological factors in crime. In accordance
with the general orientation of the preceding chapters of this volume
we shall distinguish between theories which are essentially class-
oriented and those not so oriented. Our presentation will therefore
not always be on strictly chronological lines. What do we here mean
by ‘class-oriented’? Obviously, not every theory which stresses the
undisputed prevalence of delinquency of the traditional type in the
lower social strata can be called ‘class-oriented’ — otherwise nearly all
theories of delinquency would come under this heading. This label
can be attached only to those explanations which are based on certain
characteristic features of the different social classes, on the existing
conflicts between the latter and between the subcultures created by
them.

CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

By far the most important, comprehensive and influential of the class-
oriented theories of crime and delinquency are those based upon the

499

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

concepts of the criminal subculture and anomie. Above in Chapter 19
(s. 1(a)) we have briefly surveyed the different views on the concept
of ‘culture’ and its significance for the sociological interpretation of
crime. We have also referred to the fact that, while under the influence
of the cultural anthropologists that concept has more and more been
interpreted in an objective, neutral, wertfrei sense, this does not in-
variably apply to the terms mass-culture and criminal subculture
which are often used with undertones of strong moral condemnation.
In sharp contrast to such undertones recent decades have seen the
development of a comprehensive and consistent concept of the
criminal subculture capable of interpreting in detached scientific lan-
guage certainly not the whole but at least considerable sections of
adolescent and even adult criminality. While, with one important ex-
ception, most of the theoretical spadework has been done in the
United States, some significant contributions of a mainly factual
nature have also been made in Britain.

Before describing the external forms and the various types of the
criminal subculture we have to trace the historical development of its
theoretical basis.

Human society is divided into groups: the more advanced, com-
plex and sophisticated it becomes the larger will be the number of
groups which it contains. With some of these groups we shall have to
deal below in Chapter 24. Groups are not classes ; they may— as in the
case of schools or religious communities — consist of members of
different social classes, but the latter may with Ginsberg be called
quasi-groups. 1 In a criminal subculture we find groups, such as gangs,
as well as classes, but its most characteristic feature are the problems
arising from class conflict. When searching for the historical roots of
the connection between class conflict and crime we have to remember
that, while for Marx economic conditions were responsible for crime,
he made no important contribution to the sociological analysis of
crime and the criminal subculture. His closest collaborator Friedrich
Engels, too, dismissed crime as a futile and primitive form of indivi-
dual protest against the iniquities of society; therefore, it ‘never be-
came the universal expression of the public opinion of the working
man, however much they might approve of it in silence’, and a new
form of opposition, i.e. the political, had to be found instead. 2 Ferri,
for much of his life an enthusiastic Marxist, 3 was also more concerned
with the economic causes of crime than with its sociological analysis.
We have to turn to a non-Marxist sociologist, Emile Durkheim, for
the beginnings of such an analysis of the sources of the criminal
subculture.

500

CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES OF CRIMINAL SOCIOLOGY

1. The Theory of Anomie: Durkheim and Merton

We have to be careful in our use of tbe vital but often too vaguely
defined and too generously applied term anomie. As Merton points
out, 4 it can be found already in the late sixteenth century in roughly
the same sense in which it was revived three centuries later by Durk-
heim, notably in his Division of Labour and his Suicide , 5 At a first
glance, the connection between anomie and the criminal subculture
seems far from clear. The literal translation of anomie is normless-
ness; in a criminal subculture there may, as we shall see, well exist
strong norms of conduct, but they are at variance with those of the
dominant larger culture. Durkheim opens his discussion of anomic
suicide with the statement: ‘No living being can be happy or even
exist unless his needs are sufficiently proportioned to his means.’ 6
While there are obvious limits to the physical needs of man, the ‘quan-
tity of well-being, comfort or luxury legitimately to be craved by a
human being’ cannot be defined and limited in objective terms; such
desires are insatiable, and ‘insatiability is rightly considered a sign of
morbidity’. The only force which could possibly regulate such desires
is a moral one provided by society and public opinion. There are cer-
tain accepted ideas in society of, for example, the upper and lower
limits of the standard of living for workmen or for the different cate-
gories of workmen, just as for members of other social classes, but
these ideas and limits are subject to change according to changing
economic and moral standards. In times of economic disasters or of
an abrupt growth of power and wealth those standards are suddenly
and violently upset, and it takes a long time to find new ones. Dis-
orientation of appetites, no longer controlled by public opinion, and
a state of deregulation or anomie is the result; no established classes
exist any more, and a race begins for unattainable goals. ‘The less
limited one feels, the more intolerable all limitation appears.’ Under
such conditions, religion loses most of its influence, and the govern-
ment which should regulate the economy becomes its servant. Suicide,
anomic suicide, is one of the consequences of this state of affairs,
homicide may be another. In fact, Durkheim used his analysis of the
general phenomenon of anomie to examine, among other problems,
the statistical relationship between suicide and homicide and tried to
prove that while what he called the egoistic form of suicide moved in
the opposite direction to homicide, anomic suicide was likely to move
in the same direction, in other words in an anomie-ridden society' we
are likely to find a high rate of both suicide and homicide. 7

‘Sociologists cannot be allowed to go on for ever clinging to the
coat-tails of Durkheim and Weber’, writes a political philosopher,

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

Stuart Hampshire. One can hardly criticize Robert IC. Merton for
‘clinging to the coat-tails of Durkheim’— what he did in his Social
Theory and Social Structure 8 was immeasurably to enrich and deepen
the ideas of his predecessor. If, mutatis mutandis, we would use an —
admittedly rather far-fetched— analogy from musical history we might
compare the relationship between Durkheim’s and Merton’s concepts
of anomie with the relationship between Beethoven’s earlier and, say,
Mahler’s later symphonies. In the words of one of his biographers , 9
‘from Beethoven . . . Mahler inherited his conception of the symphony
as a work concretely expressive of aspects of human life’, but Mahler
expanded the Beethoven symphony to express ‘a whole world of feel-
ing’ — which, of course, does not mean that Mahler was a greater com-
poser than Beethoven, but merely that he was able to draw upon the
lessons of another century of musical history and creative experience.
Like Durkheim, Merton bases his analysis on the dangers inherent in
any sort of discrepancy between human needs and the means avail-
able to satisfy them, but while Durkheim’s discussion remains some-
what abstract, almost independent of time and place and remote from
the realities of life, Merton uses a wealth of observations drawn from
the contemporary American scene to demonstrate in a far more con-
crete way the consequences of a conflict between ‘cultural goals and
institutional norms’ and to work out a typology of different responses
to this conflict. Moreover, while Durkheim emphasized — and perhaps
even over-emphasized — the basically limitless nature of certain human
needs and ambitions as one of the main sources of anomie, Merton
shows that dangerous discrepancies can also arise in a society and in
circumstances where those needs and ambitions are not at all un-
limited but merely go beyond what can be satisfied in socially accept-
able ways . 10 Far more clearly than Durkheim and with much greater
sophistication he deals with the problems created by the lack of proper
balance between, on the one hand, the values dominating a given
society and thecultural goals which, in accordance with those- values , : 11
are held out as justifiable objects to all members of that society, and,
on the other hand, the approved ‘institutional norms’ and opportuni-
ties of reaching those goals. If there is no equilibrium between these
fundamental elements of the social structure the conditions are
created for anomie to become widespread. Neither the relationship be-
tween goals and norms nor the emphasis placed upon them are static;
at times the emphasis is mainly on the goals to be reached at all costs,
whereas there is but little interest in the ways in which they could be
legitimately reached. On the other hand, where sacrifices are required
in consequence of conformity to institutional norms social rewards
should be offered as compensation, and positive incentives to con-
formity should be given to members of all classes. In contemporary

502

CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES OF CRIMINAL SOCIOLOGY

American culture, Merton believes, a stage has been reached where
the emphasis is overwhelmingly on the achievement of certain objec-
tives without due regard to the question of whether they can be
achieved by legally approved means. The ‘American Dream’ knows
of no limitations on the road to success (p. 136), a statement which
reminds us of the stress placed by Durkheim on the limitless nature of
human ambitions. In this ‘American Dream’ monetary success plays
the predominant role, and there exists an immense amount of ‘ex-
hortational literature’ to keep up intense pressure on individuals to
strive for such success, with correspondingly strong condemnation of
those who fail in this rat race. While the striving for monetary success
is not peculiar to American society it is not its only theme (p. 166),
and Merton makes it clear that there are also other forms of imbalance
between cultural goals and the approved means of reaching them
which may equally well produce anomie (p. 166).

Itis of crucial significance for the understanding of Merton’s theory
to bear in mind that he does not regard the discrepancy between cul-
tural values and goals and approved ways of achieving them as in it-
self sufficient to produce anomie and deviant behaviour; in other
words, lack of opportunity is not enough unless it occurs in a society
with an egalitarian ideology which preaches the gospel of equal
opportunity for all comers. It is this irreconcilable contrast between
the prevailing ideology and the actual state of affairs that causes the
trouble and explains why there may be a higher correlation occasion-
ally between unfavourable economic and social conditions and crime
in American society than in far poorer countries where a ‘rigidified
class structure’ exists side by side with ‘differential class symbols of
success’, i.e. where the ideology of desired achievements is suitably
adapted to the diverse opportunities open to the various social classes
(pp. 146-7). It is here that, as we observed above in Chapter 20, 1(3),
Merton’s theory may remind us of Albert Camus’s statement: ‘The
spirit of revolt can only exist in a society where a theoretical equality
conceals great factual inequalities’, and already there we mentioned
Merton’s five types of individual adaptation (some of which may
rather mean maladaptation) to those incongruities within society.

It is this insistence on the fateful role played by the egalitarian ideo-
logy in a world of factual inequality that makes Merton’s theory of
anomie a class-oriented theory of society and of crime, especially as
he tries to relate his types of adaptation (or maladaptation) to the
general characteristics of the different social classes. His first type is
conformity, where no discrepancy exists between goals and opportuni-
ties and which is probably the most common type among all classes —
otherwise society would break down. It is different with his second
perhaps not quite appropriately called innovation: here the

503

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

cultural goals and ambitions exist in the same way as in the conforming
cases, but the approved institutional means of achieving them are re-
jected in favour of more effective, though officially proscribed, tech-
niques for which Merton uses the term innovation. While from the
point of view of individual psychology this solution is not unlikely to
be encountered in all classes of the community there are sociologically
good reasons to believe that it is particularly frequent among lower-
class Americans, because the American stigmatization of manual
labour and the inferior status of the minor white collar workers ex-
clude the possibility of success comparable to that of organized vice,
rackets and crime. One might add that, as far as manual labour is
concerned, it is not only its stigmatization and lower rewards, but
also its narrowing scope which means reduced opportunities and
growing frustration. With regard to the latter, it was also discussed
above (Chapter 16, V)in connection with the ‘frustration-aggression’
hypothesis as a potential cause of crime within the framework of
individual psychology. Merton explains, however, that he is not con-
cerned with individual character or personality types but with ‘general
modes of adaptation’ to general sociological situations arising within
a certain cultural and social structure (p. 152), and he is critical of
individualistic psychologies such as the Freudian which pay insuffi-
cient attention to the fact that different social classes are likely to pro-
duce different forms of frustration (p. 140, Note 12).

Passing to his other types of adaptation Merton hypothesizes that
what he calls ‘ritualism’ should be characteristic of the American
lower-middle class, i.e. the type of adaptation which implies resigna-
tion, abandonment of any more ambitious social and pecuniary goals
coupled with an almost compulsive adherence to social norms, i.e. the
‘playing safe’ philosophy (p. 1 50). Here he rightly pauses to ask him-
self whether this can really be treated as a form of ‘deviant’ behaviour
as it is not generally regarded as a social problem. Although potenti-
ally leading to suppressed frustration, anxiety neuroses, and guilt
feelings this mechanism of lower-middle-class family discipline is,
Merton believes, not likely to be a frequent factor in crime, but he
admits that further research is needed on it.

The least frequent form of adaptation is what Merton calls ‘re-
treatism’, i.e. the rejection of both high cultural goals and socially
approved techniques of achieving them (p. 153). Such persons are
sociologically speaking aliens; they do not really belong any more to
the society in which they seem to live. Here we enter the world of the
bum, the vagrant, drunkard and drug addict (see also above, Chapter
20, 1, 3). Retreatism is not, however, restricted to them; it may equally
affect certain other classes of persons socially greatly under-privileged
for reasons of race, religion, nationality, etc.

504

CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES OF CRIMINAL SOCIOLOGY

As Merton, briefly discusses white collar crime under the heading of
‘innovation’ it seems that he makes no fundamental distinction be-
tween the white collar crimes of prosperous business men and the
general run of offences committed by lower-class persons as a result
of the conflict between goals and lawful opportunities. This is sur-
prising in view of the obvious sociological and psychological differ-
ences between these two categories.

Merton’s theory of anomie has had a profound impact on crimino-
logical thought, especially in the U.S.A., but it has had its critics, too.
We will deal with the latter first. Tappan, in the excellent chapter on
‘Social-cultural Theory’ of his recent textbook, 13 points out that,
while American society is in some parts criminogenic, this should not
be taken as meaning that Americans live altogether in a ‘criminal cul-
ture’ or in a ‘sick society’. However, it was Merton himself who
stressed that anomie should not be regarded as an all-pervading
phenomenon. Tappan regards Merton’s theory as a generalization
which is becoming increasingly less accurate in the middle of the
twentieth century since the rigidity of the present class structure is
more generally accepted now by the lower and lower-middle classes.
The Welfare State together with a powerful trade unionism and the
growth of the civil service have, he thinks, made the common man
willing to accept the fact that he is common and that he would be well
advised to make no effort to be more. All this reduces the frustration
felt by the growing lower-middle classes and is likely to reduce the
volume of crime and other forms of discontent within this group. It is
different with the middle-middle and upper-middle classes, ‘a dimi-
nishing though still significant part of the population’; here the scars
left by their failure to achieve the desired success may explain some
unexpected middle-class crimes. Finally, Tappan regards Merton’s
emphasis on the normless character of American culture as exag-
gerated; in this culture there are still certain firmly fixed standards,
and in particular the values attached to human life and personal
liberties are no less strong than in the last century.

Our criticism of this analysis is briefly this: Tappan’s view seems to
be far too optimistic and hardly justified in the face of the constant
increase in crime. The U.S.A. Federal Bureau of Investigation reports
for 1962 an increase in arrests for crime of 7 per cent over 1961, and
for teenagers alone it was even 9 per cent (The Times, 4.3,1963) — in-
creases which are in conformity with the general trend over the years.
To assume that the growing prosperity of recent decades has brought
with it growing contentment and a feeling of resignation overlooks
the fact, to which attention has been drawn above in Chapter 19, that
with improved economic and cultural conditions aspirations usually
rise accordingly; people do not always accept their limitations as

505

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

easily as Tappan imagines. A certain measure of support for his views
may be derived from the findings of a British investigator, Ferdynand
Zweig (see above, Chapter 19), but as already stressed the latter’s
working-class material does not seem to be representative. If there
would be nothing else to show how little many working and lower-
middle class persons have in fact accepted their present lot and given
up hope to ‘better themselves’, the enormous volume of betting in
every form-— 13,000 or 14,000 betting shops have been opened in
Britain in the past few years since this form of betting was made law-
ful — should provide food for thought. Generally speaking, gambling
and especially a gambling fever of the kind the western world has been
witnessing for years are a symptom not of contentedness but of the
opposite frame of mind. 2 * * * * * * * * * * 13 In the strike-ridden Ford factory town of
Dagenham, Essex, where, an investigator asks, do its interests lie? ‘In
football pools, betting shops, television, bingo, cars and public
houses’ (report in The Times , 5.2.1963).

Bloch and Geis, 14 in their criticism of Merton’s theory, question
among other points his view that there are hardly any lawful oppor-
tunitiesfor upward mobility among lower-class male adolescents.This
is a factual issue on which opinions can be divided, and Bloch and
Geis write of course only with American conditions in mind, but as
mentioned above (Chapter 20, 1(2)) the view seems to be widespread
among American writers and certainly not limited to Merton that the
era of truly substantial opportunities for social betterment has van-
ished in the United States.

2. The Theory of the Delinquent Subculture

We can now turn to those, also mainly American, writers who have

further enlarged and enriched the basic elements of the Durkheim-

Merton theory of anomie in order to strengthen the foundations of

the theory of a criminal subculture. They are almost exclusively inter-

ested in the implications of this theory for the criminal behaviour of

American lower-class male juveniles and adolescents, while the corres-
ponding implications for adult crime are often neglected. In the pres-

ent chapter we are following this line of thought only in so far as the
problems of juvenile and adolescent delinquency will here be discussed

from the angle of social class. In Chapter 26 they will be treated in-

dependently of class as phenomena of physiological and psychological

development and maturation, while Chapter 24 looks at them in con-
nection with family, school, and other social groups.

(a) There is, first, Bernard Lander’s statistical study of 8,464 cases

of juvenile delinquents in Baltimore. 15 One of the hypotheses in his
research, in particular in the section based on factorial analysis, is that

506

CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES OF CRIMINAL SOCIOLOGY

anomie is the most important factor in the analysis. The delinquency
rate is a measure of the degree of anomie; another measure is the per-
centage of house ownership, i.e. the latter is an index of social stabi-
lity, and so is the percentage of Negroes in an area, i.e. the higher this
percentage the higher the likelihood of anomie. The second factor in
Lander’s analysis is a socio-economic one, measured by rent and
education. Lander’s interpretation of the results of his factorial analy-
sis is that juvenile delinquency in Baltimore is ‘fundamentally related
to the stability or anomie of an area’ (p. 59). While the districts of the
city which are characterized by poor economic conditions such as bad
housing, low rents and overcrowding are often identical with those
showing instability and anomie, the relationship that really matters
in our search for the causes of juvenile delinquency in the city is
anomie. On the other hand, it alone is not sufficient ‘to account for a
complex matrix of social inter-relationships’; it has to be supple-
mented by the socio-economic factor (p. 88). While Lander’s work is
valuable on account of the sophistication of its statistical techniques
and also because of its understanding of the non-economic aspects of
the problem it cannot be regarded as a substantial contribution to the
anomic theory of delinquency. It stresses the close association be-
tween anomie and certain economic factors and postulates the suprem-
acy of the former, but how the two sets of factors have to co-operate
in order to produce delinquency is not altogether clear. Merton, while
expressing appreciation of Lander’s ‘ingenious effort’ to define the
meaning of anomie in objective terms, is also doubtful whether
anomie can really be measured by the factors used in his analysis.
The fortuitous availability of certain variables in the Baltimore census
records cannot, he points out, make adequate substitutes for data
directly reflecting the rates of disrupted social relationships (p. 165).

(b) Far more influential than Lander’s mainly statistical work has
been the almost simultaneous sociological study of the criminal sub-
culture in Albert K. Cohen’s Delinquent Boys. 16 Although Durkheim
and the concept of anomie are not mentioned in this book and there
is only a short and perfunctoiy reference to Merton’s ‘illicit means’
theory, the influence on Cohen’s ideas of these two peat predecessors
is probably far deeper than he seems to realize. In his view that theory
may offer a plausible explanation of adult professional crime and of
certain types of adolescent and juvenile delinquency, i .e. of utilitarian
offences against property, not however of the non-utilitarian offences
which are, he argues, the real characteristic of the criminal subculture
with which his book is primarily concerned (p. 36). However, as
already stressed in our review of Cohen’s book and also underlined
by Merton, there is no reason why the conflict between culturally pre-
scribed goals and the limitations imposed by the narrowing of lawful

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

opportunities should not be capable of leading also to offences of a
non-utilitarian character. 17 What Cohen does not seem to take suffi-
ciently into account is the lasting and all-pervading effect which frus-
tration may have on the whole personality of the individual and the
potential irrationality of his reactions (see above. Chapter 16).

Leaving aside this point where the difference between Cohen’s and
Merton’s theories can easily be resolved we now have to examine the
similarities between them and consider how far Cohen has proceeded
farther in the direction indicated by Merton. First and foremost, his
theory is also strongly class-oriented. The whole of his theory has as
its basis the overwhelming strength of class differences, and one of the
central chapters of his book is entitled ‘Growing Up in a Class Sys-
tem’. It is not his view that only the working-class child has problems,
but that the latter are different from those of middle-class children
and more likely to lead to delinquency. The family plays an important
role in this, not, however — as psychological and psycho-analytical
case studies try to show — because of its internal structure (broken
homes, etc.) but because of its specific position within the larger social
structure, i.e. as a unit in a class system. What he has to say about the
characteristics of this system is more or less on the lines of the com-
prehensive American literature on the subject, and reference can be
made to our discussion in Chapter 20. For him, the salient point here
is the child’s growing awareness of the existence and the strength of
class differences as they affect his family and himself. Cohen admits
that in a democratic society such as that of the U.S.A. status, as in-
herited from his family membership, is not everything — personal
qualities do also matter — but it is nevertheless of profound signifi-
cance. Moreover, middle-class ethics — partly derived from Protestant
capitalism (Tawney) — and working-class standards and values differ
in important aspects. Much more weight is attached by middle-class
families to such qualities as ambition, personal responsibility and
achievement, rational planning and the ability to postpone the gratifi-
cation of desires, to control of aggression and respect for property.
The lives of middle-class children are less restricted to narrow primary
group relationships, and they tend to cultivate wider, secondary
group associations extending beyond the family circle. In one way or
another these middle-class values are also imposed upon the working-
class child, and this co-existence of two different status and value sys-
tems in the working-class child’s life and that of his family inevitably
leads, in the author’s view, to conflict and confusion, especially as— -
and this is the point where Cohen’s analysis has met with much criti-
cism — working-class boys are by no means all inclined in a wholesale
fashion to reject those middle-class values and standards in favour of
their own. There are too many strong pressures working in the

508

CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES OF CRIMINAL SOCIOLOGY

opposite direction, and in practice the cleavage between middle- and
working-class standards is often far less marked than might be ex-
pected from the theoretical distinction. Not only are many working-
class parents to some extent, perhaps subconsciously, attracted to the
middle-class way of life, but the educational system of American soci-
ety is wholly devoted to the preaching of middle-class ideals and the
development of middle-class personalities (p. 113). The working-class
boy, who is subject to these influences and to some extent internalizes
the middle-class standards with all their attractions, but is neverthe-
less aware of his many handicaps in the competitive game, will develop
ambivalent attitudes towards the two social classes which dominate
his life and has to face a difficult problem of adjustment. Basically,
there are three ways of solving this problem, and in describing them
Cohen makes use of W. F. Whyte’s classic distinction between college
boys and corner boys. 18 Both types hail from the working classes of
a poor Italian district of Boston, but their solutions differ widely. The
college boy deserts his original way of life in favour of middle-class
education and standards, and his career bears close similarity to the
English grammar school boy of working-class origin as described by
Jackson and Marsden (see above, Chapter 20). The second, and most
common, solution open to the working-class boy is what Cohen calls
the ‘stable corner boy response’ (p. 128), i.e. an acceptance of his
limitations and an effort to make the best of whatever legitimate
chances are offered to him within his working-class life. It is essen-
tially the type of adjustment which Merton calls conformity and it
avoids the efforts, risks and potential disappointments attached to the
college boy’s solution, on the one hand, and the radical break with
traditional values inherent in the third, the delinquent, solution.

What are the characteristics of this delinquent solution ? They have
to be explained in terms of Cohen’s theory of the criminal subculture
which plays a crucial role in his book, and it is here in particular that
he claims to have advanced beyond the explanations of juvenile delin-
quency given by other, similar, theories. Whereas the latter have
merely tried to show how a criminal subculture is transmitted from
one individual to another he tries to explain its specific content and
the reasons for its existence (p. 18). This claim is not quite justified as
other writers before Cohen have also described the essential features
of a criminal subculture and why it exists in certain surroundings. It
has to be admitted, however, that Cohen’s analysis, while producing
no further factual evidence, has added important new considerations
to our theoretical understanding of the phenomenon, and it has done
so mainly through the light it has shed on the significance of class
conflicts. The idea that there are cultural variations, subcultures,
within a common culture is certainly not a new one in sociological

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

and anthropological literature. 19 In fact, it might be said that most
social groups, institutions, professions and classes have their own
specific subcultures, although their members also share a common
culture within the nation and may have some part in the subcultures
of groups outside their own. There is no reason why the concept of a
subculture should be limited to geographical areas: it might well be
extended to groups, occupational and others, scattered throughout
the whole country. Criminologists have turned their attention to the
problems of a criminal subculture comparatively late, and probably
first in relation to its existence within the narrow confines of penal
institutions, although the work of the ecological school (Chapter 23,
below) had no doubt prepared the way. It is only in the past ten or
fifteen years, however, that the matter has been tackled systematically
and on a broader basis, although — as already indicated — mainly with
reference to juvenile delinquency and usually ignoring its implications
for adult crime. As Cohen rightly stresses, even if confined to juvenile
delinquency in the United States there are many variants of the
criminal subculture, but certain traits are, he thinks, common to all
of them (p. 23). The most striking of them is its negativistic character
(p. 28), largely caused by the ambivalent attitude, mentioned before,
of many working-class boys towards the norms and values of middle-
class culture. It means that the delinquent subculture is not really
different from, or in conflict with, those dominant norms and values
but rather shows a ‘negative polarity’, i.e. certain forms of behaviour
are considered right for the only reason that they are held to be wrong
by the dominant culture. In this way, by accepting middle-class stan-
dards but ‘turning them upside down’ in his actual behaviour, can the
delinquent type of ‘comer-boy’ build up for himself a subculture and
acquire status in terms which he is able to meet (p. 121). Whereas the
ordinary, conforming, type of ‘corner-boy’ is willing to ‘temporize
with middle-class morality’, the member of a delinquent subculture
rejects any such compromise (p. 130). Utterly contemptuous of that
morality, this subculture glorifies acts such as stealing, vandalism,
and violence because they are the very antithesis of middle-class
values. In psycho-analytical terms, the mechanism of ‘reaction-
formation’ comes here into play (p. 132; see on it Chapter 17, 1(h)).
Cohen does not claim that this emphasis on the distinctly negativistic
contents of the delinquent subculture applies to the whole range of
working-class delinquency (p. 1 55) ; it applies only to those for whom
wholesale participation in that subculture is achieved through effec-
tive interaction with others who are in the same position with similar
problems of adjustment — interaction leading to group solidarity and
the emergence of common standards (pp. 59 ff.). Only by sharing
these standards with others can the participants acquire the status

510

CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES OF CRIMINAL SOCIOLOGY

denied to them in the middle-class culture, which leads to the con-
clusion that the delinquent subculture is a gang culture. The solution
has to be ‘a group and not a private solution’ (p. 66), which explains
the subtitle of the book ‘The Culture of the Gang’. Altogether, as
Cohen repeatedly stresses (for example pp. 148 ff.), his book does not
try to answer questions concerning individuals, i.e. why a certain boy
becomes a delinquent and a member of a gang and of its delinquent
subculture; it is rather concerned with the general, sociological, ques-
tion why this subculture comes into existence in a certain section of
the community and its working class. On the other hand, he acknow-
ledges our debt to the psycho-analysts for their often illuminating
studies of individual cases (p. 183) ; he is also willing to concede that
there may be two or more different types of juvenile delinquents,
some of them mainly subculturally and others mainly psychogenically
determined (p. 17), and there is even the possibility that in most cases
these two sets of factors ‘blend in a single causal process’. Looked at
in this way, there is no doubt that Cohen was justified in concentrat-
ing on one of these sets, leaving the study of the individual side to
psychologists and psycho-analysts, but the reader of his book will
often find himself asking why it is that, for example, some of the ‘cor-
ner-boys’ remain conformists and non-delinquents, whereas others in
the same sociological category join the delinquent subculture and the
gang. The answer can be given only by reference to psychological and
psycho-sociological, in particular temperamental and family, factors.
Cohen explains that his own approach, far from minimizing the im-
portance of the family in all this, rather magnifies it (p. 75), but as
mentioned before, he is interested not in the internal structure of the
family but in its role in the social structure as a whole.

When trying to evaluate Cohen’s work we have to bear in mind that
it is based on the author’s general impressions, apparently derived
mainly from his work as Director of Orientation at the Indiana State
Institution for juvenile delinquents, rather than on exact field study.
As Trasler points out, 20 Cohen uses certain fundamental notions as
‘constructs’, i.e. as convenient assumptions and not as descriptions of
processes that have been actually observed. Cohen is aware of this
limitation and underlines the need for further research on such debat-
able points in his argument as the question whether working-class
boys are in fact as ambivalent in their attitudes towards middle-class
norms and values as he suggests (for example pp. 123 and 169-74).
That such feelings of ambivalence do in fact exist is shown, for ex-
ample, in Jackson and Marsden’s analysis of the, of course entirely
different, psychological situation of British lower-class ‘college boys’
who have made their way into the middle classes without being able
wholly to discard their loyalties towards their original class (see

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

above Chapter 20, 1, 2(a)). Another point where Cohen’s theory has
been questioned is his insistence upon the irrational, negative, non-
utilitarian nature of working-class gang delinquency, 21 but here too
we have to remember that he does not regard this as applicable to the
whole of working-class delinquency. It is in fact most likely that
Cohen’s characterization is true only for some sectors even of Ameri-
can juvenile gang delinquency, whereas its other sectors show strongly
rational, utilitarian features. It is even likely that within the same sec-
tor and the same gang delinquent acts may occur of both a utilitarian
and a non-utilitarian nature and that even the same individual may
indulge today in acts of the first and tomorrow in acts of the second
type, according to his mood and the specific situation in which he
finds himself. It is also a matter of regret that Cohen has made no
attempt to relate his theory of the negativistic content of the delin-
quent subculture to the observations of Merton and Camus on the
rebel (see above. Chapter 20, 1(3)), which latter seems to bear the
closest resemblance to the type which Cohen has in mind. With such
reservations, his book has the merit of drawing attention to, and
offering plausible explanations of, the great significance of the class
factor in this field.

(c) The years after the appearance of Cohen’s book have seen the
publication of several American studies also wrestling with the prob-
lems of class as a decisive factor in delinquency. The most important
of them is Cloward and Ohlin’s highly perceptive and influential
Delinquency and Opportunity . 22 Similarly to Cohen, these authors do
not here present the results of first-hand field work, and their book is
also limited to the theoretical analysis of one particular feature of
American juvenile delinquency, i.e. the delinquent gang. They, too,
claim to be filling a gap in delinquency theory by searching for the
origins of the delinquent subculture, which concept they define as one
in which certain delinquent acts are required from the members as
gestures essential for the performance of dominant roles within the
subculture (p. 7). This definition is believed to cover the most im-
portant forms of serious and persistent delinquency because only by
frequent repetition of such acts can the coveted reputation for tough-
ness be acquired and maintained. Unlike Cohen, these authors ex-
plicitly acknowledge their indebtedness to Merton and Durkheim (in
Cohen’s book the latter is not even mentioned). While their theory is
strongly class-oriented, they are inclined to attach greater significance
than Cohen does to inequalities arising from economic factors. To do
justice to this book it seems advisable to separate, as far as possible,
those points which merely constitute criticisms of the preceding litera-
ture from those where the authors make their own positive, and to
some extent original, contribution. Much overlapping between these

512

CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES OF CRIMINAL SOCIOLOGY

two sides of the book is, however, bound to occur. To take the former
aspect first, the strongly class-oriented character of their theory
emerges with particular clarity in their detailed criticism of the view,
expressed by Bloch and Niederhoffer, 23 that delinquency, although
much more common among lower-class youths, is basically due to
the general difficulties of adolescence which are similar everywhere
irrespective of social class, race and culture. For the lower-class boy
there are, these authors admit, the additional problems of adjustment
to middle-class status; their dilemma is therefore a twofold one, but
their delinquencies, while more frequent, are basically of the same
kind and have the same causes as those of middle-class boys. More
recently, Herbert A. Bloch, in his spirited contribution to Organized
Crime , 24 has repeated his view that the ‘intergenerational’ tensions
between young and old are far more important as an explanation of
gang delinquency than conflicts between the social classes. It seems
doubtful, however, whether these eternal tensions between the genera-
tions, important as they will remain (see below, Chapter 24, 1), are as
serious and bitter nowadays as they used to be in the past. The grow-
ing economic strength and consequent independence of the working-
class adolescent together with the increasing indifference and apathy
of their parents make it appear to be more likely that the previous
struggle for power is getting more and more replaced by a silent sub-
mission of the older generation. Moreover, it is argued by Cloward
and Ohlin that, while delinquent acts do occur among adolescents of
all classes, middle-class youths involved in them do not belong to
delinquent subcultures, nor do they receive any support and approval
from the non-delinquent members of their class and from the conven-
tional norms predominant in it. For this reason alone middle-class
delinquency is not only rarer but also less dangerous than its lower-
class counterpart. This touches what seems to us one of the most
fundamental issues of the whole problem discussed in the present
chapters. It is an issue which writers such as Dahrendorf or Hoggart
have in mind when they ask ‘how people see society’ and find the
answer in the everlasting dichotomy of ‘them’ and ‘us’ and its corre-
lates in other languages. 25 It was also one of the fundamental issues
in our chapters on ‘Economic Crime’ in Criminal Justice and Social
Reconstruction, where we dwelt on the attitudes of different sections
of the community towards certain legal enactments and different
types of property, 20 and in Group Problems in Crime and Punishment
where the conclusion was drawn from various observations that
‘there are groups within society, probably much larger and more
deeply affecting its well-being than the small stage-army of profes-
sionals: people neither downright anti-social nor altogether honest,
but honest in certain situations and dishonest in others. There is no

CC1I-H 513

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

such thing as “honesty” or “dishonesty” in general.’ 27 The inevitable
consequence for our present discussion is this: while there are many
subdivisions nowadays within that all-embracing term ‘the working
classes’ with a great deal of differentiation according to income,
standards of living and education, aspirations, and the like, that old
dichotomy— which is far older than Marxism (Dahrendorf, p. 287)—
still remains, and with it remain many of the old differences in atti-
tudes towards the legality, morality and binding force of the official
code of lawful behaviour. In particular, a sceptical and ambivalent
attitude towards the law and its administration and towards autho-
rity in general, as the latter present themselves today, is probably far
more widespread than commonly believed in official and upper- and
middle-class circles. What is nowadays called the criminal, or if
limited to juveniles, the delinquent, subculture is only the visible part
of the iceberg, consisting of the minority of those who actually break
the criminal law for the reasons given by Cohen and Cloward-Ohlin,
but behind it stands a much larger, invisible or only dimly visible
section of the population, drawn from the same social class and the
same subculture, which, openly or by implication, encourages and
supports them in the same way as white collar criminals are encou-
raged and supported by their peculiar subculture.

There exists, however, a criminal subculture not only in certain sec-
tions of the working or lower-working classes, but mutatis mutandis
also in the higher social classes. This seems to be the inescapable con-
clusion to be drawn from our discussion of white collar crime. The
difference may be — but this is only speculative — that the subculture
of big business is limited to certain sectors of social life, encourages
and supports only the lawbreaking activities of its adult members, and
probably has in fact mainly adult members, whereas the lower-class
subculture embraces with equal strength juveniles and in particular
adolescents. There are also middle-middle and lower-middle class sub-
cultures in which lawbreaking activities of types different from those
of the lower class are encouraged and supported. It may be doubtful
whether all these subcultures are in fact formed within certain social
classes or rather within certain occupational or professional groups
whose memberships are drawn mainly from the same social class.
Subcultures can exist in groups as well as in areas (see above). For
example, there may be subcultures of lower-middle-class coal-
merchants or greengrocers or small builders respectively, each of them
with certain specific ways of thinking and acting, with specific atti-
tudes concerning the way their business should be conducted, most
of them appearing perfectly respectable (or nearly so) to the world
outside but nevertheless condoning or even supporting the unlawful
activities, the fiddling and diddling of a minority, maintaining by way

514

CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES OF CRIMINAL SOCIOLOGY

of rationalization that without such practices their particular branch
of business could not survive. The attitude of deeply hurt innocence,
the complete lack of comprehension of the other fellow’s view we may
encounter when politely rejecting, for example, the well-intentioned
proposition of a builder, carrying out repairs for which an insurance
company is ultimately responsible, to pay him a sum lower than
shown on his estimate and receipt and to ‘split the difference’, or of a
business man selling a new luxury article liable to a high purchase tax
and proposing to give us a declaration that the article was second-
hand and therefore free of tax — all this has to be seen to be believed.
There are, in short, plenty of widely employed illegal techniques and
usages of conducting business, in short, lower-middlc-class white
collar offences, which are to all those concerned known to be clear
violations of the criminal law, but rationalized as a matter of course
and without any signs of compunction. Very rarely will they come to
the notice of the authorities and be punished.

The main points arising from this digression arc, first, that we
agree with Cloward and Ohlin, against Bloch and Niederhofier, that
the delinquencies of lower-class adolescents have to be explained in
the first place as the natural outcome of a delinquent subculture sup-
porting them and that thcdifficulticsstemming from the general prob-
lem of adolescents everywhere how to achieve adult status, though
important, play a secondary role only. We also agree that for this
reason middle-class delinquency is likely to assume a different charac-
ter from that prevailing among lower-class groups. We regard it as
essential, however, that the present abundance of studies limited to
the subject of the delinquent subculture of lower-class gangs should
be supplemented by similar studies of other criminal subcultures exist-
ing in different social classes among adults rather than adolescents.
That the practical difficulties will be very substantial cannot be denied.

Of some importance is also Cloward and Ohlin’s criticism of
Cohen’s over-emphasis on the ambivalent and negativistic outlook of
the lower-class delinquent adolescent, with their consequent greater
emphasis on economic factors (pp. 91 ff.). There arc in their view
many such youths who do not aspire to middle-class status and are
content to remain in their own class, but feel dissatisfied with their
economic prospects and are all out to improve them by legal or
illegal means. In this connection the authors suggest a more refined
typology of aspirations, according to whether or not aspiration is
directed towards change of social class, and try to relate it to four
different types of adolescents. The most serious type of delinquent is,
they think, likely to be the one who docs not aspire to middle-class
status but feels frustrated in his effort to achieve better living standards
within his own class. Cloward and Ohlin arc somewhat critical of

525

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

Cohen’s assumption of a strong feeling of ambivalence towards
middle-class norms and values on the part of lower-class gang mem-
bers— an ambivalence leading to an equally strong reaction-forma-
tion, with a violent but in reality only superficial rejection of middle-
class culture. This assumption of ambivalent feeh'ngs has also been to
some extent questioned in a widely quoted article by Sykes and
Matza 28 who claim that many lower-class juvenile delinquents are in
fact willing to admit both the legitimacy and the moral rightness of
the dominant, i.e. middle-class, social order and are therefore in no
way ambivalent towards it. If such boys commit offences they assuage
their guilt feelings not by the psychological device of reaction-
formation but rather by that of ‘neutralization’, a term which these
authors prefer to the more commonly used ‘rationalization’ (see
above, Chapter 16), i.e. they work out a ‘system of defences to crime’
analogous to the generally accepted legal defences of insanity, neces-
sity, etc. This system may mean, for example, a denial of responsibility
because the injury inflicted was due to an ‘accident’, or in maintain-
ing that the victim alone was to blame or that he could well afford the
loss.

The solution of this controversy concerning the ambivalent nature
of lower-class delinquency will probably have to be found partly in
individual differences and partly in differences concerning the depth
of the criminal subculture to which the individual belongs and the
intensity of its anti-social tendencies. Too much generalization will be
futile. As Mays points out in one of his studies of a Liverpool slum
district. 29

What we are probably faced with in these inner city areas is not so much
a well-integrated community whose standards and values are in sharp
conflict with the wider society, but a very loosely related population which
as a whole is less intolerant of ways of behaving that would give offence in
other areas, and where the mechanisms of social control are less rigidly
applied . . . Buried within this generally tolerant and unambitious mass
are a number of smaller groups which are more closely knit together and
which in many respects accept a deviant, even defiant, way of life, and these
smaller groups have a pervasive influence which to some extent infects the
whole population to a sufficient degree to produce a pattern of life which
is so unusual that it may be termed a subculture.

Mays expresses some doubts as to whether the term subculture
should be applied to the whole inner urban area or whether it should
be confined to the more closely knit pockets of resistance, but he con-
cludes tins part of his discussion by admitting that so far insufficient
data are available and ‘our conceptual categories are too blurred’ to
give a satisfactory answer. We would suggest, for the time being at
least, that we might accept the likelihood of a criminal sub-subculture

516

CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES OF CRIMINAL SOCIOLOGY

existing within the larger subculture, implying that feelings of am-
biguity towards middle-class norms and values may be traceable in
the latter but hardly in the former.

In an able analysis of the theories so far discussed David Bordua 30
finds a contradiction between the theories of Cohen and Cloward-
Ohlin in the fact that the former believes the members of delinquent
gangs to be recruited mainly from those who, unable to cope with the
demands of middle-class society, turn their backs to it, whereas
according to Cloward-Ohlin that category comes from the ranks
of those who feel well equipped to reach middle-class status, but
are prevented from it through the handicaps of their social back-
ground. This contradiction, however, is apparent rather than real
since the different interpretations may well fit different types of in-
dividuals. As stressed above in Chapter 20, 1(2), both the presence as
well as the absence of opportunities for upward social mobility may
create their own peculiar psychological traumata, but of different
kinds and for different individuals. Even in a society where such
opportunities do exist they are likely to be restricted to the very gifted
or lucky few, and many members of the excluded majority will be-
come embittered. Where no such opportunities exist, some of the
underprivileged will draw comfort from the thought that their mis-
fortune is nobody’s fault, whereas others will, as ‘Robert Allerton’
did, turn against society (see Chapter 20,1(3)). Some of these grievan-
ces are justified, others are not, again others are perhaps justified only
to some extent. To the psychologist the question of justification does
not really matter since in W. I. Thomas’s famous phrase, which can-
not be often enough repeated, ‘if men define a situation as real it is
real for them’ (see above at the end of Chapter 2, and Chapter 16, next
to Note 108). His interests lie elsewhere: why does this particular per-
son ‘define this particular situation as real’, whereas others do not?
To the sociologist, as to the political reformer, however, that question
of whether certain grievances are, from the viewpoint of an impartial
observer, justified, does matter.

In a rigidly sociological study such as that of Cloward and Ohlin
we cannot expect too many concessions to the psychological and
psycho-analytical ways of thinking, but as Cohen had to borrow from
the latter the concept of reaction-formation, Cloward and Ohlin have
to resort to that of extrapunitiveness (Rosenzweig, see above, Chap-
ter 16, HI). They are aware of the great practical significance of
Rosenzweig’s classification of individual reactions to frustration, but
refer to his work only in a short footnote (p. 112 f. 4) and complain
aboutthe scarcity of our knowledge about the conditions that produce
an extrapunitive rather than an intrapunitive or impunitive frame of
mind. The rigid limitation of their book to American publications

517

the sociology of crime

prevents any reference to Grygier’s study with its important combina-
tion of original hypotheses and factual material (above, Chapter 16),
and their own lengthy discussion of the subject (pp. 1 12-24) hardly
advances our knowledge. It might have been worthwhile, for example,
further to consider the relationship between the impunitive type of
Rosenzwcig and Grygicr and Merton’s retreatist type and drug addic-
tion, or between the extrapunitivc type and their criminal or conflict
subcultures. Similarly to Cohen’s explanation of gang delinquency
Cloward and Ohlin make it clear, however, that the, for all practical
purposes most important, sub-species of the extrapunitive type, i.e.
the one who puts all the blame for his failure on the injustice of the
social system, is also the one who is mostly in need of collective sup-
port and finds it in the gang (pp. 1 24-7). Of the more original features
of Cloward and Ohlin’s treatise two deserve to be mentioned. There is
first their attempt to divide the varieties of delinquent subculture into
three major types, the ‘criminal’, the ‘conflict’, and the ‘retreatist’
respectively (pp. 20 if.), the first of them striving mainly after material
gain and committing property offences, the second seeking status
through force and committing acts of violence, the third — reminiscent
of Merton’s retreatism — characterized by a withdrawal from con-
ventional roles and goals and therefore seeking refuge in drug addic-
tion and liable to commit the kind of offences connected with it. Each
of them presents its own peculiar problems of control, but while con-
flict and retreatist groups seem to predominatein Negro and Puerto
Rican districts the exact distribution of the three types in lower-class
areas cannot as yet be ascertained. Nevertheless, the authors make an
interesting, though largely speculative, attempt to relate their three
types to the specific milieu of the neighbourhood and the opportunities
it offers for criminal activities of a particular brand (for the details sec
their Chapters 6 and 7). This emphasis on the opportunities for crime
existing in different areas is closely bound up with the second, and
probably most original, contribution of Cloward and Ohlin to the
sociological analysis of delinquency, especially collective, i.e. gang,
delinquency, i.e. their attempt to link the Durkheim-Merton line of
thought to that of the Chicago ecological school of Clifford Shaw and
Sutherland’s theory of differential association. While these latter
theories will, as not class-oriented, be more fully discussed below in
Chapter 23,' the following brief remarks have to find their place in the
present discussion of Cloward and Ohlin’s work. The link between
those two, in many ways so dissimilar, lines of thought is found by the
authors in this : while both stress the profound discrepancy existing in
the opportunities available to under-privileged youths of American
city slums, the kind of opportunities which they have in mind is not
the same: while Merton means opportunities for lawful aspirations

518

CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES OF CRIMINAL SOCIOLOGY

and success, Shaw and Sutherland are mainly interested in the fact
that the opportunities of committing crime differ according to the
type of area (Shaw) and according to frequency and intimacy of con-
tacts with criminals (Sutherland). Shaw and his school stress, in their
‘cultural transmission’ theory, that certain areas breed a criminal
tradition with its peculiar, anti-social value system, passed on from
one generation of residents to the next (see below, Chapter 23);
Sutherland, in his theory of differential association (also see below.
Chapter 23), concentrates upon the learning processes which enable
the beginner to acquire criminal habits through his relationships with
established criminals. The combination of these two kinds of oppor-
tunities, the one for lawful success and the other for crime,i.e. Merton
plus Shaw and Sutherland, leads to what Cloward and Ohlin call their
theory of ‘differential opportunity systems’ (pp. x and 145 ff.). To
them, each individual occupies a certain position in both the ‘legi-
timate and the illegitimate opportunity structures’ (p. 150). Merton’s
theory of anomie describes the differentials in the availability of
legitimate ways to success, Shaw and Sutherland those in illegitimate
opportunities; each of the two opposing approaches ignores the fact
that both sets of differentials are significant and have to be correlated.
To refer more concretely to the three types of delinquent subculture
presented by Cloward and Ohlin, the ‘criminal’ type can develop only
where opportunities for stealing and where fences exist, the ‘conflict’
type only where there are opportunities for violence, the ‘retreatist’
only where drugs can be obtained. This fairly obvious point is further
developed at some considerable detail by the authors who, in their
concluding chapter, try to make use of their theory to predict the
future trends in the American crime pattern. In what is perhaps the
most thought-provoking and ‘down-to-earth’ section of the book they
foresee a further growth in aggressive and violent crime as a con-
sequence of the growing ‘disintegration of slum organization’ (p. 203),
As Merton, W. F. Whyte and Daniel Bell before them, 31 they explain
this phenomenon in the first place by referring to the, inTecent years
greatly improved, centralized and modernized organization of Ameri-
can crime. While this development, being outside the subject of the
present chapter on class-oriented theories, will be further discussed
below in Chapter 25, it has to be mentioned here because of the rele-
vance which, according to Cloward and Ohlin, it has to their theory
of the three subcultures. To them it means that, with adult crime be-
coming technically more complicated and refined, with its control and
organization becoming more centrally directed, its techniques are
getting too difficult to acquire for adolescent gang members, and the
delinquent subculture of this type of gang is no longer regarded as an
adequate apprenticeship for organized adult crime. This has the effect

519

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

of driving more and more youngsters away from the ‘criminal’ type
of subculture, which as we remember is concerned with crimes against
property, towards the ‘conflict’ and ‘retreatist’ types, i.e. to violence
and drug addiction. The latter conclusion does not seem to be entirely
convincing as even in the modern, centralized and highly organized
world of adult crime there will be many opportunities left for young-
sters to commit their less sophisticated offences of stealing, house-
breaking, etc. It seems more likely, therefore, that the effect of the
changes outlined by the authors and of the growing complexity of
modern life will be an all-round growth of subcultural delinquency.

Other factors wliicli Cloward and Ohlin regard as further contribu-
ting to the ‘disintegration of slum organization’ are the growth of the
Welfare State and the consequent decline of the political machine, the
racket, in its previous form, a process already well described by
Merton, Bell, and Whyte. In the view of these writers, with whom
Cloward and Ohlin are in substantial agreement, the Welfare State
has taken over many, but by no means all, of the socially useful func-
tions of the American political machine which provided valuable ser-
vices to the slum population and was better integrated and in closer
touch with the lower classes than the socially too distant, too respect-
able and therefore impersonal organs of the Welfare State, i.e. the
professional social workers, can ever be. The latter, hemmed in by
official regulations and without influence on the political machine,
are not in a position to offer those necessary services to the lower-class
population which, in the past, the political boss could provide. All
this, together with large-scale slum clearance which destroys the close
social coherence of the old slum (on this see below, Chapter 23), has
led to a breakdown of its organization.

Non-American readers of these concluding reflections may be left
wondering how far they might be applicable to their own respective
countries, in which the American-type political machine either does
not exist or has developed on different lines. One of the issues to be
borne in mind is that in its origin and characteristics that machine,
owes much to the influence of the Mafia (Chapter 25, below).

3. Middle-class Crime and Delinquency (see also above, pp. 459-68)

The middle-class offender has often been ignored by criminologists as
hardly worth studying. White collar criminals, in the narrower sense
suggested here in Chapter 21, II, i.e. limited to big corporations, their
top executives; and other big business men, are not only more inter-
esting but also more dangerous because of their powerful position in
society, and the same applies to lower-class criminals because of their
numbers and recidivist tendencies. Middle-class criminality is dis-

520

CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES OF CRIMINAL SOCIOLOGY

cussed mainly against this background to illustrate the discriminatory
character of criminal statistics in which a particularly large proportion
of offences committed by middle-class persons remains unreported,
and also because the norms and values of middle-class culture have
to be contrasted with those of the lower class to bring into high relief
the peculiar characteristics of the latter. Cohen, who presents a
detailed comparison of these two cultures, nevertheless admits (p. 160)
that the section of his book in which he tries to explore the causes of
middle-class delinquency, is ‘frankly a speculative toying with possi-
bilities’, and he expresses the view, which is similar to our own (above,
p. 514), that each social class possesses its own criminal subculture,
but that in spite of a certain kinship there are important differences
between them. What are these differences ? In accordance with those
advantages, already referred to, in status, opportunities, education,
parental supervision and training, there is the belief in the value of
delayed gratification, and, consequently, a higher level of aspirations
for the future. Middle-class youths find it easier to control their ag-
gressive tendencies; violence is as a rule disapproved of and largely
replaced by canalized inoffensive activities such as sport, or in a few

countries by organized duelling. On the other hand, there are aspects
of middle-class culture which seem to work in the opposite direction,
i.e. to the disadvantage of middle-class youths, and therefore to pro-
vide temptation of an anti-social nature. In both Cohen’s and
Cloward-Ohlin’s books much attention has been paid to Talcott Par-
sons’ theory of the boy’s masculine protest against his feminine up-
bringing. 32 Without introducing any class distinctions Parsons points
out that in the typical American urban family the child’s training
rests mainly in the hands of the mother which leads to early feminine
identification. While this may be desirable for girls it seems unnatural
to the boy and leads him to an attitude of masculine protest with con-
sequent aggressive and anti-social behaviour. 33 This is of course an
old problem and one which can hardly be solved here in passing or
without recourse to psycho-analytical theories (see above, Chapter
7). In the present chapter we are merely concerned with any potential
c ass differences in the prevalence and intensity of this ‘masculine
protest’. Cohen suggests that the phenomenon is ‘accentuated in the
social world of the middle-class child’ because the latter has less
opportunity than his working-class contemporary to see his father at
ome in his occupational role or to establish contacts with other adult
ma es who could act as father-substitutes. The ensuing conflicts are
r or aggravated by the middle-class boy’s prolonged economic
epen ence upon his parents. If all this were true, it would help to ex-
wn!v a er rate delinquency among middle-class than among
Rg-class adolescent males, which is contrary to the prevailing

521

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

views about the actual class distribution of delinquency. Until far
more specific research is done on the points raised by Parsons we have
to regard any explanation of middle-class delinquency on the lines
indicated by him and Cohen as mere guesswork. It is more than
doubtful, for example, whether the urban working-class child has
nowadays much opportunity of ‘seeing his father at home in his oc-
cupational role’ — usually, according to the routine of city life, when
fathers work they are not at home and when at home they do not
work, at least not in their normal occupations. Exact investigations' of
the subject of identification with and domination by parents such as
carried out by the Gluecks and R. G. Andry have used almost exclu-
sively case material from working-class families and give, therefore,
no information on class distinctions . 34

A few writers have recently, following Thorstein Yeblen, expressed
the view that there is in fact hardly any difference in the values and the
behaviour of the so-called ‘leisured’, i.e. upper and upper-middle, and
the working classes and they quote Yeblen’s dictum : ‘The ideal pecun-
iary man is like the ideal delinquent in his unscrupulous conversion of
goods and services to his own ends and in a callous disregard for the
feelings and wishes of others and of the remoter effects of his action.’
The only difference, they argue, lies in the way the state and society
react against criminal acts committed by members of the upper and
middle classes, which leads one of these writers, Shoham, to pose the
question: ‘whose normative barriers are more injured by this type of
conflict situation, those of the lower classes or of the upper classes
youths ?’ 35 His hypothesis is that the situation is likely to be more in-
jurious to the upper- and middle-class youths because they realize that
it is easier for them than for the others to get away with criminal ac-
tions, whereas the lower-class boy is generally ‘too far removed both
geographically and socially from the upper-middle-class youths’ to
realize fully that the latter can get away with behaviour which would
get him into trouble. Whether this hypothesis is correct will probably
depend on many factors such as, apart from individual differences,
the possibility of making such comparisons as indicated by Shoham
on the part of the under-privileged and the likelihood of growing out
of their anti-social leanings and of replacing them by more con-
structive activities on the part of the over-privileged youths.

Ralph W. England 36 finds certain differences between middle- and
working-class subcultures in their contents as well as in the duration
of their impact on the lives of their members, i.e. for working-class
youths participation in their subculture ends earlier, he thinks, be-
cause of their lower age of marriage with its responsibilities. Another
often quoted American writer, Walter B. Miller, while also upholding
the usual distinction of middle- and lower-class value systems, main-

522

CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES OF CRIMINAL SOCIOLOGY

tains, in opposition to the prevailing view, that the working-class
gang subculture is not, as Cohen assumes, merely a negative reaction
to middle-class values. 37 Miller regards it rather as an independent
system generating positive values of its own. In this his writings bear
some resemblance to Richard Wollheim’s Fabian pamphlet (see
above, Chapter 19, Note 6), who believes in the emergence of a really
independent culture of the English working classes. This view rests on
a slightly over-idealized conception of working-class standards, but
there seems to be nothing in it which would inevitably contradict
Cohen’s interpretation. In spite of the existence of a positive working-
class culture some delinquent members of a gang might nevertheless
be driven by an urge to ‘turn middle-class values upside down’ as a
protest against their assumed superiority.

English writers of working-class origin, such as Raymond Williams
(see above, Chapter 19, Note 3), are more reserved on the subject.
Williams (pp. 307 ff.) thinks that what has remained of working-class
culture after the Industrial Revolution commands respect but is in no
sense an alternative to middle-class culture. His concept of culture,
however, is here rather restricted to ‘intellectual and imaginative
work’, i.e. largely to art and literature, although he also stresses that
present-day working-class culture is social rather than individual, i.e.
it has produced important social institutions of its own and been sym-
pathetic towards education, learning and art. It is interesting that, no
doubt entirely unaware of the controversy existing between American
criminologists, he maintains (p. 31 1) that English working-class people
are by no means anxious to become middle-class : ‘The great majority
of English working people want only the middle-class material stan-
dard and for the rest want to go on being themselves’, which corres-
ponds to Cloward and Ohlin’s rather than to Cohen’s views.

It is clear that on many decisive points raised in this chapter further
research is needed. There are at present several projects on various
aspects of class in relation to crime in progress or at least contem-
plated which might produce some further clarification: two of them
in England, i.e. one ‘to test recent American theorization on delin-
quency and opportunity’, the other on the problems ‘facing the
middle-class offender upon and after Ins discharge from prison’;
one in the United States on the subculture of violence, 38 and one on
middle- and upper-class delinquency in Israel. 38 The American
research by Wolfgang and Ferracuti, to be carried out with Puerto
Rican case material, postulates that the dominant upper- and middle-
class culture and also a large portion of the lower class are non-
violent in character, but that the other portion of the latter accepts
violence in its normative system. The hypothesis to be tested is that
those violent offenders who come from a non-violent type of culture

523

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

show a more pronounced abnormality in their personalities than
the violent offenders coming from a violent subculture.

4. British Material

British studies on the subject are not numerous and mainly of a prac-
tical rather than theoretical interest, presenting the results of, usually
first-hand, observations made in certain geographical areas and there-
fore closely linked to the ecological aspects discussed in Chapter 23
below. The work of Jephcott and Carter in Nottinghamshire, the vari-
ous Liverpool studies of Mays, T. P. Morris’s research in Croydon,
and Fyvel’s book, which concentrates primarily on London, have
here to be mentioned. 40 They are, of course, also relevant to the dis-
cussion of the ecological theory of delinquency but as they provide
much material on the relationship between class and delinquency in
Britain their place is here, too.

( a ) The Nottingham University study of ‘Radby’, the fictitious
name for an English Midland mining town of 23,000 people, is, as far
as class differences are concerned, perhaps the most detailed and sys-
tematic. 41 Completed in the year in which Cohen’s book was pub-
lished it could not benefit from his discussion, but it did refer to the
writings of the Chicago school and to Merton’s first edition. On ac-
count of its importance and because it is not easily accessible, 42 it will
here be described more fully than the others. From the American
studies on class differences mentioned so far it differs in many im-
portant respects : although intended to be an investigation of juvenile
delinquency in a small town it became, from the outset, an attempt to
draw a detailed picture of local working-class life differentiated ac-
cording to sub-divisions within that class. Its hypotheses were that
‘within working-class areas different standards are upheld, and that
the differences between the norms of behaviour contribute to the
differential rates of delinquency distribution’, or more specifically,
that ‘contiguous and similar-looking working-class streets might live
by different codes and have different habits’ (pp. 14, 27 5 and 122).
This is only another way of claiming that there are different sub-
subcultures within the working-class subculture. The study does not
concentrate on the way in which this is reflected in the lives of adoles-
cents, be it as creating college-boys and stable or delinquent corner-
boys or a criminal or violent or retreatist subculture. It is interested
not in the origin and character of adolescent gangs, but in the way
lower-class families of different shades live, act and feel. Various tech-
niques of collecting the factual material required were employed:
participant or passive observation by the two field workers in Men’s
Clubs, Youth Clubs, Pubs, Dance Halls, Children’s Play Rooms, the

524

CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES OF CRIMINAL SOCIOLOGY

Community Centre, a Factory; house-to-house interviewing of fami-
lies or officials and social workers, and others. While most contem-
porary American studies concentrate perhaps too exclusively on the
adolescent boy and his gang, the Nottingham enquiry, in its concern
for the working-class family as a whole, has perhaps tended to neglect
the specific problems of the teenager. The existence of five ‘delin-
quency areas’ was ascertained, but also the fact that within them there
were ‘white’ and ‘black’ streets and that in some instances streets
materially comparable with the bad ones seemed to be free of trouble.
Eventually, two streets in the same bad area, within two minutes’
walk of each other, were selected for more detailed investigation and
comparison, the ‘white’ Gladstone Road and the ‘black’ Dyke Street
(pp. 122 ffi), the first on the whole artisan, the other labouring class,
with incomes ‘probably higher in the latter’. Material was further
collected on two other streets, but here the contrasts were not so
clear-cut, and therefore individual households were compared rather
than streets (pp. 157-67). There were 104 households in Gladstone
Road and 115 in Dyke Street. A five-point scale was used to classify
the different families, with two grades (IV and V) of ‘white’, two of
‘black’ (I and II) families, and one intermediate grade III, the latter
type being content to live alongside the ‘blacks’ but maintaining a
different set of standards more in accord with that of the ‘whites’. The
criteria used for this classification are explained in detail, and 23 stat-
istical tables are presented to show their distribution among the 5
grades (pp. 184 IT.). In the concluding chapter another detailed com-
parison is made, using 10 factors (pp. 278-86). If we now ask how far
these grades and factors tally with the classification in, say, Cohen’s
list of qualities characteristic of the American middle- and working-
classes respectively, we have first to bear in mind that the Radby fami-
lies included in the Nottingham survey were all working class, though
with different standards. The contrasts emerging from this study arc
therefore differences within the working classes rather than between
the latter and the middle classes, which may be taken as just another
symptom of the growing transformation of many upper-working-
class people into members of the lower-middle class. Nevertheless, the
same or very similar points of contrast emerge in both, the American
and the English, value systems: for example, ambitions, postpone-
ment of gratification, conscious planning for upward mobility, dis-
ciplining of children, street play, control of aggression, respect for
other people’s property, appear on Cohen’s list as characteristics of
the middle class, and on the Radby list as characteristics of the ‘white’
working-class families (grades IV and V). Many more details are,
however, given in the Nottingham enquiry than in Cohen’s more ab-
stract scheme, and many more aspects of working-class life are used

525

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

to complete the picture, such as the constant contact between the in-
habitants of the ‘black’ subculture, instability of their family relation-
ships, their lack of independence, privacy, and co-operation with
external authority, whether represented by the Church, the school, or
the police, etc., and the over-riding interest in gambling. There are, of
course, differences in the degree to which all those values of the
‘white’ families are actually cherished and acted upon. Moreover, it
is clearly the view of the research workers that there are no sharp
dividing lines between these two subcultures within the working
classes or, for that matter, between them and the middle classes, but
that everything could rather be plotted on a continuum. This is true
in particular because of the growing corrosion of middle-class values
which recently prompted The Times to write in a leading article
(18.3.1963) of a ‘middle class that, either through comparative afflu-
ence, weariness or disgust, has thrown in its hand or lost sight of its
responsibilities’. The hypothesis that very different codes of values,
habits and standards of behaviour existed even within the Radby
working classes and that they found their reflection in the delinquency
pattern was amply confirmed. No case of official delinquency was en-
countered from the high-grade families IV and V (p. 286), and delin-
quency was concentrated in the families of grades I and II (p. 182),
but even here the figures are not high. ‘Unofficial’ delinquency was
also found almost exclusively in the households I and II. There was
no direct evidence of that negativistic or ambivalent attitude towards
middle-class values so much underlined by Cohen; the position is
rather that for some members of the lowest-class households delin-
quency, in particular theft, ‘does not constitute a problem’ — they ‘see
nothing wrong with it’. It is a ‘legitimate social activity, unassociated
with any feeling of guilt’ (p. 288). Discussing Clifford Shaw’s proposi-
tion that in delinquency areas preventive measures can succeed only
through the fullest active co-operation of the local residents (see
below, Chapter 23, A 4), the authors take the pessimistic but realistic
view that, while certain possibilities for collective action may well
exist in ‘black’ areas, this does not apply to delinquency prevention:

... it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to persuade the citizens of
Dyke Street that they have a collective duty to restrain each other from
delinquent behaviour. Their whole life is tied up with such behaviour in
many ways . . . The Dyke Street code of conduct, and that of the lower
grades, does not represent just an obstinate refusal to accept the laws of the
larger society . . . [but] the people see no reason for accepting the principle
that ‘thou shalt not steal’ whether it be because they are informed that God
said so or because the law of the land said so (p. 292).

This in particular as they consider that there is, ‘abundant justifica-
tion for them to lead the sort of life which they do lead’. This means

526

CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES OF CRIMINAL SOCIOLOGY

that ‘they tend to base their behaviour upon practical tests . . . how
about the boss working a fiddle ? Is not the boss accorded status by
society, and yet is not the only difference between you and he that
“you steal in farthings and he steals in pounds” V . . . The belief
derived from such facts as these, linked perhaps with previous experi-
ence of unemployment and low incomes, is widely held, namely that
‘there is no justice in this world’ . . . (pp. 293-4).

Inevitably, the authors of the Nottingham enquiry are therefore
drawn to Merton’s analysis of the situation and its problems. Of
course they have to make the usual reservations : not everything rela-
ting to American society is applicable to contemporary Britain, but
there are at least ‘some parallels in his description of the various modes
of adaptation with some features of the “black” and “white” people’
(p. 296), especially as far as his modes of ‘adaptation’ and ‘ritualism’
— and, we might add, ‘retreatism’ — are concerned. This leads to the
interesting question of the level of aspirations among members of the
working classes to which so much attention has been paid by authors
such as Cloward and Ohlin. There is no clear-cut evidence in the
Nottingham report on the statistical distribution of the existence or
absence of higher aspirations among the various grades of the work-
ing classes in Radby, but not only the ‘black’ but also many of the
‘white’ families seem to be conspicuously lacking in ambition for
themselves and their children. Of course, the ‘whites’ want their
children to have ‘just a little bit more than we had’ (p. 286), but the
wisdom of ‘Don’t aim high and you won’t be disappointed’ also plays
an important role in their philosophy (p. 297). This bears out Zweig’s
view that ‘the worker wants little things rather than big things’ (Chap-
ter 19, above) and Hoggart’s blunt statement that there is ‘lack of
scope for the growth of ambition . . . Once at work there is for most
no sense of career . . . life is not seen as a climb . . .’ 43 As far as delin-
quency is concerned, this attitude may occasionally encourage the
commission, or support, of minor dishonesties to make up for the
absence of legitimate opportunities. In the case of the minority of
rebels, however, this absence may, as pointed out above (Chapter 19),
lead to far more serious and persistent crime. The Nottingham study
presents hardly any material on these crucial issues. Instead it con-
cludes its work with some thought-provoking references to Professor
Sprott’s pertinent observations of Chinese prisons and society. 44 In
China, it is claimed, there are very few prisoners, very few persistent
criminals, and there is very little juvenile delinquency, largely because
of the ‘wave of moral enthusiasm’, which sweeps the country and
makes everybody concerned with the part he is playing in the new
society, and because of the weight of public opinion which regulates
the behaviour of the individual and forces him to respect the law of

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

the land — a factor which, the report concludes, ‘does not operate to
anything like the same extent in English society, or apparently in that
of the U.S.A.’. Those who had been criminals under the old regime in
China— their numbers must be dwindling rapidly— are greatly helped
in their rehabilitation efforts by the thought that it was all the fault of
the pre-revolutionary system, which promptly takes the stigma off
their shoulders. Moreover, to revert to Merton’s phraseology, there
is in contemporary China, the authors think, no cleavage between
culturally prescribed aspirations and socially structured avenues for
realizing these aspirations ; everyone is ‘capable of attaining the status
to which he is encouraged to aspire’. How far the picture thus painted
reflects the reality of Chinese society we find impossible to judge, but
for our present discussion this hardly matters. What does matter is
the fact that these students of delinquency in ‘Radby’ find the cause
of the anti-social altitudes and activities of certain classes of its popu-
lation in the absence of those features which they believe make for
law-abidingness in modern China.

Even the black spots in ‘Radby’, however, do not seem to be so very
black and their crime pattern seems to be relatively harmless as com-
pared with that in the largest American and British cities. Is the ex-
planation to be found in the real facts of life in ‘Radby’ or in the way
of looking at them, i.e. were the Nottingham investigators by the way
their study was focused on the families precluded from discovering
those blackest of the blackest spots which are outside the lives of even
the ‘problem families’ ? Or was it merely the difference in size, i.e. an
ecological factor, that explains the contrast? If so, we should find an
entirely different picture in Britain’s large cities.

(b) This brings us naturally to the various writings on the subject of
the delinquent subculture in Liverpool by J. B. Mays. In his first book,
Growing up in the City, which appeared in the same year as the
Nottingham report and Cohen’s book, he gives a very detailed picture
of an underprivileged area in that city with special emphasis on the
material which emerged from his intimate knowledge of the lives of
eighty boys, members of a youth club, who were interviewed individu-
ally over a period of months (p. 29). Although he refers already to the
existence of a criminal subculture (p. 83) and stresses the function of
the gang in generating delinquency he is not yet concerned with class
problems as such. He discovers the existence of important differences
in the adjustment of these boys to the subculture of the area and dis-
tinguishes between the ‘delinquents’, who form the majority of juvenile
offenders, and go only temporarily through a delinquent period, and
the ‘criminals’, few in numbers, whose anti-social behaviour is ‘a form
of protest against and an escape from an emotionally unbearable
situation within the family circle’ (p. 148). Similarly, in an earlier dis-

528

CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES OF CRIMINAL SOCIOLOGY

cussion of outbreaks of more serious violence by adolescent gangs
(p. 113), Mays writes: ‘Not a few boys, brought up on an arbitrary
and affectionless regime of parental blows, seem to transfer their
resentment to the outside world and seek to get their own back on
society at large.’ In other words, more serious gang delinquency is
explained as in many cases due to particularly unsatisfactory family
conditions in a subcultural area rather than as a reaction to class
conflict.

Five years later, in his On the Threshold of Delinquency, which
describes his group work with members of the Dolphin Club in a
similarly underprivileged Liverpool district, he also stresses the exist-
ence of a ‘discernible delinquent subculture’ (p. 27). Many of these
boys come from families with all the characteristics of the ‘problem
family’; they have no social ambitions and an ‘inward sense of failure’.
The gangs of adolescents who roam the streets at evening are ‘frighten-
ing’. Many of them have developed ‘a chip on the shoulder’ as a result
of their unhappy relationships with their parents (p. 161), and their
attitudes towards authority are ambivalent. When called up for the
Forces they are resentful of military authority and may refuse to take
a stripe because they do not want to be different from their fellows
and to rise above them. ‘Big-headedness’ is disapproved (p. 164).
There is ‘a sharp division between those who hold themselves to be
superior to their neighbours . . . and those who assume no such
status’, between the ‘respectables’ and the ‘roughs’, with the former
striving towards middle-class values and only rarely producing delin-
quents (pp. 28-9, 169-70). Between them stand the marginal families
who are probably in the majority. We are thus reminded of the
Nottingham classification of Gladstone Road and Dyke Street and
their five grades, with the lowest grade in Mays’s words (p. 171) per-
haps representing no longer a subcultural, but rather a sub-subcultural
type and diminishing in numbers in each generation. Similar doubts re-
garding the scope of this hardest core of the delinquent subculture are
expressed in Mays’s most recent treatment of the subject. 45 Although
there are many facts and observations in Mays’s surveys of the Liver-
pool slums which seem to provide ample material to build up a class-
oriented theory of delinquency, the author himself has in his larger
studies refrained from explicitly declaring his approval of the Merton-
Cohen-Cloward and Ohlin line of theoretical reasoning. It is only in
his recent ‘Re-assessment’ of the delinquency area theory that he
takes a step in this direction by acknowledging our indebtedness to
their writings (pp. 224-5) and by stressing that in a society such as
ours certain disadvantageously placed classes will feel themselves ‘de-
barred from enjoying their share of the rewards of industrial product-
ivity’ and that the resulting frustration will in certain cases lead to

ccu-i 529

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

crime. 40 In his latest important book Crime and the Social Structure , 47
which was published after this chapter had been completed and can
therefore be only briefly referred to, Mays explains more fully his
view that the concepts of criminal subculture as developed by Cohen,
Cloward and Ohlin and other American writers are only of limited
value to our understanding of crime in Britain. He finds here ‘not so
much a hostile, negativistic and resentful reaction against higher in-
come group ways of life as the development of an indigenous culture
which met their own peculiar and social needs in a fairly satisfactory
way’ (p. 96). Moreover, he believes that ‘curiously enough, the differ-
ential class structure has itself probably helped towards creating
sufficient stability in the social structure to preclude the development
of excessively criminalistic and violent sub-groups’ (p. 97). This view,
coming from a research sociologist with an unsurpassed knowledge
of working-class life in one of Britain’s largest cities, deserves to be
taken very seriously, and if it should be correct it would disprove the
validity of our tentative criticism of parts of the ‘Radby’ study (see
above at the end of (o)). Is it correct, however ? It was probably so not
many years ago when Mays collected the case material for his earlier
books, but things have been moving very fast in this country after the
war, and they seem to be moving in the direction of more and more
Americanization with all its consequences here as in so many other
fields.

Although Mays frequently stresses the very important role played
by the working-class mother in the fives of the family he makes no
attempt to use this factor to produce a theory of ‘masculine’ protest’. 48

(c) The picture which Fyvel presents in his book The Insecure
Offenders is of course painted in many different colours. There are
the feelings of emptiness, boredom, insecurity, of being excluded, of
having no real prospects, which haunt the teenagers in our present
society. Behind it all, however, looms the ghost of the class problem.
While Fyvel knows his Galbraith and his Barbara Wootton, he may
not know Merton and Cohen, but he hits on explanations which are
practically identical with theirs, though formulated in less abstract-
theoretical language. In the last resort, he sees the causes of the glar-
ing deficiencies in the lives of working-class teenagers in the ‘historic
division of England into two nations which has enabled the middle
classes to look after their own leisure time . . . while anything in crude
or commercial entertainment was thought good enough for the work-
ing class’ (p. 96). The educational reforms produced by the 1944 Act
simply mean that the talent found among working-class children is
drained away and those who are left behind, the ‘also-rans’, feel all
the more strongly that they are second-class citizens (pp. 26, 227).
The schools, the youth clubs are all inclined towards the old middle-

530

CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES OF CRIMINAL SOCIOLOGY

class culture with its sharp distinctions (p. 22), whereas in reality we
are witnessing the ‘passing of the Bourgeois Age’ (Chapter 15): ‘It is
this exclusive bourgeois class system and culture which is today crack-
ing up’, with its own classic concepts of right and wrong (p. 190). Seen
from this angle, and with some further gh'mpses at the blessings of
mass-advertising, there is no need for any other explanations of the
present rise in teenager delinquency.

(i d) Reference has already been made in Chapter 20 to T. P.
Morris’s The Criminal Area which, though primarily a study in social
and criminal ecology, is also of some importance in the present con-
text as it strongly underlines the class-oriented character of crime.
For some purposes, he writes, class may represent ‘the most mean-
ingful frame of reference’ (p. 165), and he maintains that, while what
he calls ‘psychiatric’ delinquency occurs in all social classes, ‘social’
delinquency flourishes in working-class districts because of the sup-
port it finds in working-class culture (p. 176).

Chapter 23

NON-CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES. IN
PARTICULAR: THE ECOLOGICAL THEORY.
CULTURE CONFLICT. RACIAL AND OTHER
MINORITIES. ECONOMIC FACTORS. THE EFFECT
OF WARS AND OTHER CRISES. DIFFERENTIAL

ASSOCIATION

Most of the sociological theories discussed in the present chapter
have got rather out of fashion nowadays, having been pushed into
the background by the class-oriented theories of the previous chap-
ter. To some extent this has been nothing but part of the usual
process of a more up-to-date and refined theory succeeding one that
has become slightly stale and failed to keep up with the trend of
modern scientific ideas in general. In some cases, however, these very
grown-up babies have been thrown out rather brusquely with the
bath water. To do them justice it has to be borne in mind that most
of the theories in this chapter are not only closely inter-related with
one another, but have also helped to prepare the ground for the
class-oriented theories of Chapter 22.

A. THE ECOLOGICAL THEORY 1

This is true in particular of the ecological theory which, after arousing
a great deal of interest already in the middle of the nineteenth cen-
tury, reached the peak of its popularity in the period between the
two world wars, but has gradually retreated into the background in
the decades after 1945. It is striking to compare its full treatment in
the slightly older American textbooks such as Barnes-Teeters, Taft or
Reckless’s Criminal Behavior , with its neglect in those first published
a few years ago ; often the words ‘ecology’ and ‘delinquency area’ do
not even appear in the index. Even Tappan, to mention only one of
the best of them, can spare no more than two pages for it, much of
which is taken up by a reproduction of one of Shaw’s diagrams of
Chicago. Yold,-too, has only two pages. 2 Sic transit gloria mundi.
Clearly, every theory has its proper life span and climate, and thirty

532 ' •

NON-CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

to forty years seems to be the average period allotted to most of them
where they can flourish and dominate the scene. After that, people
begin to get tired of them and bored. In contrast, the leading post-war
Continental textbooks, such as van Bemmelen, Exner, and Hurwitz,
give more space to the subject; and so does the pre-war edition of the
German Handworterbuch der Kriminologie?

Whereas in Chapter 11 the potential criminogenic influence of a
few geographical factors, such as the climate, were briefly discussed,
we are now concerned with the role played by certain aspects of
human or social ecology such as the density and mobility of the
population, in particularmigration, urbanization and urbanism, and
the problem of the 'd elinqu ency area’. Some overlapping between the
physical-geographical and the ecological-sociological ways of ap-
proach is, of course, inevitable. Moreover, writers on human ecology,
including students of delinquency areas, have occasionally borrowed
concepts and theories from physiological ecology; for example, the
idea that cities grow in successive zones from the centre to the out-
skirts (see below, s. 4) seems to have been taken from the physio-
logical-biological theory that biological organisms develop in this
way; ’with'. certain organs "such as the brain forming the centre of
nervous activity and sending its waves to the periphery. As with most
of such analogies, this one proves confusing rather than illuminating. 4

In this connection, the comparisons attempted by various writers
between the different regions of a country have also to be mentioned.
Reference has already been made previously to the attempts of some
nineteenth-century criminologists such as Lombroso to explain
differences in crime rates between North and South in terms of
climate (see above. Chapter 11). Exner, 5 who studied such regional
differences for Germany, considered the potential effect of the differ-
ential consumption of alcohol and also of the mixing of races through
successive waves of immigration and invasion, with particular em-
phasis on racial characteristics. His tentative conclusion was that the
lower crime rates of the north-western provinces of Germany had
largely, though not exclusively, to be explained in terms of such racial
and temperamental characteristics, formed in the course of centuries
through the mixing of races,

>

I. POPULATION DENSITY AND koBILITY. MIGRATION AND
IMMIGRATION. TOWN AND COUNTRY: URBANIZATION AND

URBANISM M

We are here concerned with at least three different, but closely inter-
related problems : How far does (1) the density, and (2) the mobility of
the population, and (3) its distribution over communities of different

533

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

size affect the adult and juvenile crime rates? And what are the
explanations of the existing variations? The main reason why, after
nearly a century of detailed study, these subjects are now attracting so
much less attention is probably the greater scepticism and sophistica-
tion of present-day criminologists, who are better aware of the un-
satisfactory statistical material usually at their disposal and of the
danger of reducing very complex subjects to over-simplified causal
explanations. The theory of multiple causation, with its readiness to
admit the potential causality of many factors, thereby inevitably
reduces the importance of each single one of them and in particular
of those factors which are most closely inter-related with, and
dependent on, others.

In addition to the three major general problems referred to above,
there exists a variety of more specific aspects, often of a national or
even regional character only, which have, in certain periods and cer-
tain countries, been regarded as particularly important, such as, for
example, that of the frontier criminality 15 and especially of the crime
rate among foreign immigrants.

1. Density

Of all the problems so far mentioned, that of the relationship be-
tween crime and the density of the population has been studied least
systematically. At first glance, it seemed attractive and plausible to
assume that greater density, with its consequent intensity of friction,
would mean greater criminality. The statistical evidence for this
assumption, however, is particularly difficult to produce. Density has
to be studied mainly in relation to larger areas such as whole coun-
tries or at least provinces, and such overall pictures are likely to hide
profound internal differences within the areas concerned. It is not
surprising, therefore, that the work devoted to this particular aspect
in the nineteenth century in Britain and on the Continent now
appears to have been largely wasted. This conclusion emerges, for
example, from the historical details given in T. P. Morris’s book The
Criminal Area. 1 In his discussion of A. M. Querry’s work Morris
criticizes as not altogether convincing Querry’s rejection of the
hypothesis that increases in population density lead to increases in
crime, but he has to admit that the truth is often more complex than
mi ght appear from the casual collection of a few statistical figures
such as usually presented in nineteenth and early twentieth cen-
tury publications. In Britain and France comparisons between the
densely populated ‘manufacturing’ districts and the sparsely popu-
lated agricultural areas were frequently made, throughout showing
the same trend in favour of the latter.

534

NON-CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

In Professor Leone Levi’s detailed survey of offences committed in
England and Wales between 1857 and 1878 s the relation between
density and crime is regarded as very intimate, ‘closer probably than
toany other cause whatever’. To illustrate this he produces figures, at
the extremes of which we find the rural counties of Wiltshire, Dorset,
Devon, Cornwall and Somerset with a density of 238 persons to the
square mile (1871 Census) and 0-59 crimes and the suburban counties ]
of Middlesex and Surrey with 3,490 density and a crime rate of
IT 5.

In Criminal Statistics England and Wales for the year 1893 (pp.
88 ff.) a comparison is made between the figure of 48 crimes against
property per 100,000 of population in Cornwall, 184 in England and
Wales and 343 in Monmouthshire. A warning is given there, how-
ever, that comparisons of whole counties may be misleading since
crime may not be equally distributed over the whole area. In Criminal
Statistics England and Wales for the year 1908, the following figures
are given for crimes per 100,000 of population: (1) above 250: Lon-
don, Glamorgan, Monmouthshire; (2) 201-250: Durham, North-
umberland, Lancashire, Staffordshire, Worcestershire; (3) 151-200:
Kent, Middlesex, Nottinghamshire, North and East Riding, North-
amptonshire, Cheshire, and so on, down to (7) 50-75 : Caernarvon,
Merioneth, Cardigan, Pembroke, Carmarthen, and (8) under 50:
Cornwall. Similar trends emerge from the figures quoted by Bonger
from Criminal Statistics England and Wales 9 for 1905. Glamorgan
used to be the subject of special attention on the part of crimino-
logists, and in the Howard Journal of 1932 (pp. 3-4) it is pointed out
that that county, with only twice as many inhabitants as the rest of
Wales (which meant of course a far greater density of population), had
four times as much crime, but that the very high rate of emigration
was gradually reducing the difference (see also Criminal Statistics for
1930, p. viii). However, here as elsewhere it was probably not so
much the high population density as such but the rate of unemploy-
ment, closely related to it, that was to blame, although here, too, i
generalizations are risky. 10 It may be noted, though, that in a very
careful recent study of French crime statistics Szabo found a high
positive correlation between density and crime or, as he expresses it,

* dtlinquance et population eparse'P-

The exceptional difficulties of drawing reasonably safe conclusions
from density figures may explain the shift of criminological interest
to the apparently more tangible subjects of town versus country and
of migration, and eventually to that of delinquency areas "within
cities. ~ ‘ . '

535

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

2. Mobility and Immigration

(a) In General. We are here concerned not with social or vertical
mobility (see above. Chapter 20), but with physical or horizontal
mobility. That the latter has vastly increased' in the' course of the
present century is a commonplace observation, and the explanation,
improved transport facilities combined with greater restlessness, is
also obvious. The almost universal availability of motor cars and the
expansion of air traffic have provided the opportunities for easier
mobility and with them the stimulus. People have got used to frequent
changes of their places of residence and work and to travelling wider
distances for work and pleasure. In addition there are large-scale
movements in certain directions, such as in Britain from the periodic-
ally distressed North and from South Wales to the prosperous South-
East and the Midlands, in the United States from East to West and
from South to North. For California the present writer could report
already in 1955 12 a population increase from less than seven million
in 1940 to nearly thirteen million in 1953, and the state seems now to
have reached seventeen million. Of the 1940-53 increase, four million
immigrated from outside the state. For American Negroes the
mobility rate is particularly high. In an interesting table in Elliott and
Merrill’s Social Disorganization 13 it is shown that within the period
March 1957-8, 19-2 per cent of whites and 25T per cent of non-
whites had moved to a different house in the United States, which
involved the movement of thirty-three million persons. How many
of them had moved to different communities or states is not stated,
however. The Second World War was a period of perhaps unprece-
dented population movements within Britain, caused partly by the
needs of war industries and partly by mass evacuation from the most
vulnerable towns to safer places. 14 It was, therefore, a migration in
an unusual direction.

As, with such exceptions, migrations go mostly from rural to
urban areas the subject is closely related to that of urbanization.
However, even in normal times not all migrants move in this direc-
tion; people also leave the towns for the country or they migrate
from one area to another of a similar type. The location of industries
may be a determining factor, and the present efforts of the British
Government to move people and industries from the over-populated
areas and the coming into existence of new towns may, in the end, to
some extent counteract the prevailing trend. To give only one ex-
ample, the most recent venture in this field, the town of Dawley,
between Wolverhampton and Shrewsbury, with a planned popula-
tion of 90,000 is intended to provide housing and employment for

536

NON-CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

some 50,000 people from the Black Country and Birmingham (The
Times, 9.4.1963). Moreover, efforts are made to move large numbers
of civil servants from the London area to smaller towns. Migration,
in other words, has features of its own in addition to those resulting
from its major tendency to make large cities even larger.

How far is mobility associated with crime and delinquency ? It has
often been taken for granted that people who move, and in parti-
cular those who move frequently, are more likely to commit offences,
which leaves it open what is here cause and what is effect. It may well
happen that those who have already become offenders find it advis-
able to change their abode, partly in order to avoid detection and
partly because of the stigma incurred after detection and punishment.
Occasionally, two adjoining districts have been contrasted to show
that the one with a stable population is more law-abiding than that
with a fluctuating one; the high rate of juvenile delinquency in the
London Borough of Shoreditch with high mobility has been com-
pared with the low rate of the neighbouring Borough of Bethnal
Green with its stabler population, but one has to bear in mind that
there are many other factors, too, which show the former to be more
under-privileged than the latter. 16 In short, mobility may be one
criminogenic factor of many and, especially where it is often repeated,
it may be merely a symptom of general instability and a restless dis-
position. Moreover, it has to be borne in mind that migrants are very
often young unmarried males, i.e. a category with a particularly high
crime rate.

In Italy an investigation is in progress 16 to study the criminological
effect of the internal immigration from the South to the North, in
particular to Lombardy. Its preliminary findings have been sum-
marized as follows: ‘At least as far as adults are concerned, migration
does not appear to represent a criminogenic factor of social impor-
tance. There has been no significant growth of crime parallel to the
migratory movement. . . . The only things that have been observed
with greater frequency are patterns of criminal behaviour whose
origin is to be found in the ethnical and cultural tenets the immi-
grants bring with them to their new homes.’

In the City of Philadelphia, Leonard Savitz, who has made a
special study of the subject, found, in spite of various reservations due
to the nature of his material, that for the Negro children of that city
migration did not have the criminogenic effect usually attributed to
it;” in fact, ‘the Negro migrant population was considerably less
delinquent than the Negro Philadelphia born population’ (meaning
the juvenile population). Among the explanations tentatively put for-
ward by Savitz is the possibility that the acquisition of the local
subcultural norms may be thwarted by a.barrier isolating the migrants

THE' SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

from the non-migrants ; he also regards it as possible that the crimino-
genic features of migration come into play only where the number
of migrants is small so that they are unable to create their own
ghetto-like community. In the area which he studied 44 per cent of
the entire population in question were migrants. This seems to be in
line with the finding of other American investigators that the Negro
crime rate is negatively associated with the proportion of Negroes in
the population, i.e. the higher the latter the lower the former. 18

In the Borstal Prediction Study it was found that those Borstal
boys who had lived at the same address since childhood were better
‘risks’ than those who had moved about frequently, but the value
of this finding was somewhat reduced through the large numbers of
cases where no information was available on tills factor. 10

The criminogenic effect of the wartime migrations within Britain,
referred to above, is also difficult to assess with any degree of
accuracy as the available material is too scanty and imprecise. 20

(b) Immigration of Foreigners in Particular . 21 The criminological
significance of large-scale immigration movements of foreigners has
been studied especially in the United States as the principal receiving
country. It is now followed, on a much smaller scale, by Israel. In
Britain, the subject aroused considerable interest in the earlier part of
the century, mainly in relation to the Irish immigrants, and more
recently it has been revived in connection with the increased rate of
immigration from Commonwealth countries such as the West Indies
and Pakistan. The latter was preceded by the influx of refugees from
Nazi persecution which was, however, rather reminiscent in charac-
ter to the Huguenot emigration from France in the seventeenth cen-
tury. Neither the immigration of the nineteen thirties nor that of
Russian Jews to the East End of London around 1900 seem to have
been widely discussed from the criminological angle.

Some interesting material on the last-mentioned wave is given,
however, in a study by an American writer, Lloyd P. Gartner, 22
where it is stated that, although the terms ‘peaceful’ and ‘law-abiding’
were consistently applied to this particular immigrant community of
the East End of London, nevertheless ‘it had its criminal offenders’.
No comparative statistics are given, and reference is made to the
difficulty of sorting out Jewish aliens from aliens in general. Crimes of
violence were absent, and the offences committed were, as had to be
expected, mostly of a commercial character. By far the most alarming
aspect of the matter was the ‘decorously termed social evil’ of prosti-
tution and, closely connected with it, the ‘white slave traffic’. While
the number of Jewish girls who became victims of this traffic is
regarded by Gartner as entire guesswork, there was apparently no
doubt about the participation of Jewish immigrants in it. As far as the

NON-CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

size of this particular wave of immigration is concerned, Gartner
estimates that in the 40 years after 1880 the population of Russian
Jews in East London had approximately quintupled from its original
60,000, partly by direct immigration and partly by a high birth rate.

The whole matter is in any case closely related to racial, religious,
and political factors, and also to the theory of culture conflict to be
discussed below (B, 1). Here we shall confine ourselves mainly to the
statistical side of the subject.

With the gradual diminution of mass immigration from Europe to
the U.S.A. the subject has nowadays lost most of its practical interest
to American criminologists and has become rather old-fashioned. To
the theoretical and historical criminologist and to the student of
human prejudices and errors in general it is still important, however,
as demonstrating the many pitfalls of criminal statistics, especially
when influenced by differential penal treatment, and also the danger
of trying to provide plausible explanations for phenomena the
existence of which still remains to be proved. This danger is parti-
cularly acute where, as in the case of the U.S.A., those errors were
eagerly seized upon to produce an increasingly restrictive anti-
immigration legislation. 23 It is one of the lasting merits of modern
American criminologists to have destroyed the old anti-immigrant
myth, although full success was achieved only after the flood of
immigrants had already been brought to a halt by that legislation.

Only rarely have these criminological studies been related to the
corresponding work done by psychiatrists. The latter have been
mainly concerned with the apparently high incidence of schizo-
phrenic disorders among immigrants, sometimes explained by selec-
tive immigration, i.e. the theory that pre-schizophrenic individuals,
inadequately integrated within their environment, may seek a solu-
tion of their difficulties in emigration. 24

As will be pointed out later, the concept of culture conflicts covers
a field much wider than the conflicts likely to arise through migration
from one country to another with possibly very different language,
mores and laws. In fact, however, it has been studied mainly in
relation to the foreign immigrant, where it provided a welcome,
ready made, opportunity to blame the immigrant for the increasing
American crime rate. One of the best surveys of the literature up to
1938 is provided in Sellin’s classic volume Culture Conflict and Crime,
where it is pointed out that ever since 1910 investigations had shown
the. immigrant crime rate to be slightly lower than that of native
white Americans. This in spite of the ‘differential’, i.e. unfavourable,
treatment by the forces of law and order suffered by the immigrant
on account of his origin and his inferior economic and political status
(Sellin, pp. 73-4). Soon it was discovered that the term ‘foreign-born’

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

was far too general, that if the statistical figures were to make sense at
all distinctions were essential according to age, sex, country of origin,
marital status, length of stay in the new country, whether the immi-
gration had been from village life at home to city life in the U.S.A.,
and so forth, and that a classification had to be made according to
types of crime. It had to be taken into account, for example, that
immigrants included a particularly high proportion of young, single,
impecunious males of little education and skill, in other words, of a
section of the population always showing a higher crime rate than
others. Another point frequently ignored in earlier statistical studies
of immigrant crime was that many of these offences were simple pass-
port contraventions ; 25 nor was sufficient attention paid to the great
diversity of the factors which were responsible for the immigrant’s
decision to leave his native country. Moreover, American criminal
statistics, by considering not the racial, ethnic and cultural back-
ground but merely the previous nationality of immigrants, had
lumped together groups as different as Russians and Russian Jews,
Slavs and Czechs, Italians and Sicilians . 26 These weaknesses have to
be taken into account also when the striking contrasts between immi-
grants from different countries are compared . 27

When some years later the searchlights were switched from the
immigrants themselves to their American-born children it was be-
lieved by many investigators that it was this second generation that
produced the highest crime rate . 28 In his famous study of the Ameri-
can juvenile gang Thrasher stated that this phenomenon was, in
Chicago at least, largely one of the immigrant community of the
poorer type, mostly concerning American-born children of immi-
grant parents . 29 Eleanor Glueck found that the social and economic
conditions of these second generation children were not more un-
favourable than those of their parents, and she concluded that their
higher crime rate could, therefore, be due only to their more intense
culture conflict . 30 In fact, their crime rates were higher than those of
their parents, but slightly lower than those of the native-born, i.e.
they had become more Americanized than the first generation . 31

Another interesting finding was that certain changes appeared in
the type of crime in that, for example, the American-born children of
Italian immigrants committed mostly property offences, whereas
their fathers had mostly committed crimes of violence— a clear
example, it was thought, of the operation of an ‘acculturation
process ’. 32 However, changes in the type of crime committed were
observed not only between the first and second generation of immi-
grants but also within the first generation itself. Thomas and
Znaniecki in their study of the Polish peasant immigration to the
U.S A. maintained that, whereas those peasants who had committed

540

NON- CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

murder at home usually killed members of their families or other
people near to them, those who became murderers in America
mostly killed strangers. Their explanation of this phenomenon, if it
should be borne out by the facts, is interesting and seems also quite
convincing; it is not so much based on the concept of culture conflict
— unless taken in a very general sense — as on the contrast between
rural and city life. As one writer quoted by Sellin (p. 89) puts it: ‘It
is not simply that a Pole or an Italian has come to America, but
rather that a villager has come to the great city.’ As long as the pea-
sant remains in his native village his contacts with strangers are very
limited and his emotions and frictions are almost exclusively con-
cerned with his own family. Once he is plunged into the abyss of city
life his contacts with outsiders widen; while his emotional life be-
comes less intense, he is full of suspicions and fears of the unknown
people around him, and, whereas now his wife and family are on his
side, every stranger is an enemy. 33 In short, we may conclude from
this, that Maxim Gorki’s Russian peasant who in his village had to
beat his wife to give vent to his frustration (see above, Chapter 16, V)
will instead assault strangers after his emigration to New York.
Another important distinction affecting the crime rate of immigrants
was made by E. D. Beynon in a study of Hungarian immigrants in
Detroit, 31 i.c. between immigrants living in closed colonies and those
living in mixed communities. The delinquency rate of the former is
usually lower, an observation also made in other studies reported by
Sellin (e.g. on Japanese immigrants). The explanation is that people
living together in closed national communities are less inclined to
report delinquencies to the police and that there is closer group
control and solidarity among them which favours the internal settle-
ment of conflicts. 33

As far as countries outside the U.S.A. are concerned, for France
Gabriel Tarde refers already to an investigation of 1876 which had
shown a crime rate of 8 per 100,000 for Frenchmen against one of 41
for foreigners resident in France, which he explains as the result of
their separation from their home country and their families. 33 For a
period approximately eighty years later, Denis Szabo reports that
Avhilc in the big cities the crime rate of the foreigners exceeded that of
the natives it was lower in the small towns and rural areas, but he
adds that the high proportion of foreigners residing illegally in Paris
explains to some extent their high crime rate. 37

The large-scale immigration of Irish labourers into certain parts of
Britain has for many years attracted attention as a social problem
and occasionally been blamed for the exceptionally high crime rate of
Liverpool and the whole of Merseyside. Before the First World War
the main stream of Irish migration went to the U.S.A. and the

541

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

British Dominions, but after that war these countries became prac-
tically closed to them, and Britain, especially Lancashire and the
Glasgow area of Scotland, was the only alternative. According to the
report presented in December, 1937, by an inter-departmental com-
mittee the figures of migration from the Irish Free State to the
United Kingdom rose from 11,300 in 1934 to 24,000 in 1946, which
was however not regarded as a complete picture {The Times, 6. 12. 1937).
Some material on this subject was also published in 1934 in the
Social Survey of Merseyside 38 where it is stated that the Irish popula-
tion there was not quite as large as often estimated. Taken together
with the fact that the official crime rate of Liverpool had for a long
time been very high 39 — although there has been some recent improve-
ment 40 — it was tempting to blame the Irish immigrant for it. While
reliable figures do not seem to be available to form a definite judg-
ment, it is likely that the Irish rate is in fact higher, possibly much
higher, than the non-Irish one. The explanation would be in many
ways similar to that provided by American criminologists for their
own immigration crime problem, with the difference that language
difficulties do not play the role here which they may have played in
the U.S.A. It is rather unemployment and the system of casual dock
labour that are to blame as they hit the poor Irish immigrant even
harder than the native. According to the Merseyside Survey (p. 202)
56-8 per cent of the Irish immigrants were unskilled labourers. More
recently, attention has been drawn to the subject of crime among
Irish people in London by the Cambridge survey Robbery in Lon-
don. 41 The authors are very fair, however, in stressing that taking into
account the high proportion of young single men among these
immigrants it did not appear that in 1951, for which year the figures
were collected, the numbers of Irish involved in robbery were dis-
proportionately high. (Figures for 1957, the year which otherwise
served as a basis for comparisons, were not available.) They con-
clude: ‘It cannot be assumed without further evidence that Irishmen
are more likely to commit robbery with violence than Londoners
when like is compared with like . . d 42 Another important finding
was the unusually high proportion of first offenders among those
born in the Irish Republic, a finding which was regarded as reliable in
view of the great care taken to verify it (p. 65),

No other wave of immigration to Britain has created so many
difficulties and aroused so much passion as that of coloured people,
mainly West Indians, Pakistanis and Indians, in the last ten or fifteen
years. The literature on it is already fairly substantial, 43 and the sub-
ject is of interest to criminologists from three angles : first, the aspect
dealt with in the present chapter, i.e. immigration and crime;
secondly, as an important contribution to the phenomenon of crowd

non-class-oriented theories

behaviour, notably in connection with race riots (Chapter 25 below) ;
and, thirdly, from the point of view of victimology (Chapter 25
below). It is, of course, almost impossible to keep the discussion of
these various aspects strictly separate since as soon as we deal with
the criminological significance of this particular wave of immigration
the second and third of these topics are immediately involved, too.
An accurate estimate of the size of this particular immigrant popu-
lation is difficult to obtain. According to Ruth Glass (p. 32), it was
not known for example how many West Indians lived in London in
1960, but the figure of about 40,000 was accepted in 1958, at the time
of the notorious disturbances, ‘by virtue of mere repetition’. 44 The
bulk of the statistical information presented in her book refers not to
total numbers but to a selected sample only. Nor are apparently any
figures available which would enable us to compare the crime rate of
these immigrants with that of the white residents for the country as a
whole or for individual areas. The tools for any statistical investiga-
tions of this kind are, therefore, missing and wherever there are refer-
ences to offences committed by West Indian immigrants they usually
occur in the course of discussion of the racial disturbances in order to
explain or justify the latter. On the other hand, interesting information
is given, particularly in Ruth Glass’s book, on the local distribution
and housing problems of these immigrants in London, matters which
are indirectly of great criminological significance as explaining both
the offences committed by and against them. It is the well-known
vicious circle of colour prejudice, high rents and overcrowding, a way
of living not yet adapted to the strange new surroundings creating
further prejudice and more intense friction. 45 Added to this are ‘the
folklore of the coloured man’s sexual behaviour, and of the white
man’s reactions to it’ (Glass, p. 85) to make the whole picture a most
depressing one. However, in view of the close inter-relationship
between offences by and against the immigrants and the scarcity of
material available on the first category the whole subject will be left
for later discussion in connection with the phenomenon of crowd
behaviour in general and race riots in particular (Chapter 25 below).

Interesting sidelights on the criminality of foreigners, whether or
not classed as ‘immigrants’, have been thrown by a recent study of
shoplifters by Gibbens and Prince. 46 Of their 1959 sample of 532
London women shoplifters 150 (29 per cent) were born abroad,
whereas according to the 1951 Census only 7T per cent of the
London population were foreign born. This large proportion was
mainly concentrated in the younger age groups, which was explained
by the prevalence of foreign au pair girls and students. Most of the
foreign women had been in England only for short periods, and most
of them (70 per cent) were Europeans, only 16 per cent Asians and

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

4-6 per cent each were Americans and white or coloured ‘dominions’.
The authors suggest that the ‘Europeans’, for language and other
reasons, feel more foreign here than, for example, the coloured
immigrants; moreover, they feel less constrained in their conduct
here since if things go wrong they can more easily return home than
the immigrants from Commonwealth countries, many of whom
intend to settle here. It was only in rare cases, therefore, that West
Indians, although under greater economic pressure than most Euro-
peans, were involved in shoplifting. The authors mention as addi-
tional reasons for the high shoplifting rate of European women
resentfulness about conditions of their employment — a factor widely
discussed in recent years in the English press — and the consequent
wish to take revenge in some form or another; moreover, social
isolation and detachment were regarded as an important factor too.
We might add that in some instances this may be a somewhat
milder reaction to pressures which in their more severe and lasting
forms lead to arson and other serious crimes (see above, Chapter 15,

1(c).

The high share of persons from certain Commonwealth countries
of convictions of being in possession of dangerous drugs and of
living on the immoral earnings of prostitutes has often been noted.
Between July 1, 1962, and April, 1963, it was 272 out of 416 (drugs)
and 52 out of 123 (living on immoral earnings) for the metropolitan
police district only. 47

3. Town and Country: Urbanization and Urbanism 48

To get the exact meaning of these two terms clear, by urbanization we
understand the trend of migration from rural areas to towns, by
urbanism the specific way of life resulting from this trend. In a report
on the work of a committee on urbanization set up by the American
Social Science Research Council, 49 the author, Philip M. Hauser,
points out that the fairly voluminous literature on the subject is
concerned more with the consequences of this phenomenon, i.e.
urbanism, than with a ‘consideration of the city as a dependent
variable’. Many of the generalizations presented in that literature
were, the committee thought, drawn from samples inadequate in
time and space in order to produce ‘ideal-type constructs as tools of
research’ rather than being themselves products of research, and ‘as
western scholars have had increasing opportunity to live in and to
observe urban areas in other parts of the world, they have recog-
nized more and more clearly that the process of urbanization is far
from a unitary one: that, on the contrary, there are various types of
urbanization . . .’ A similarly sceptical attitude towards the whole

544

non-class-oriented theories

subject of ‘urban sociology’, urbanization and urbanism can be
found in Ruth Glass’s stimulating chapter on it in Society. 50 One of
her main points is that, while most countries have become more and
more urbanized, the previous distinctions between urban and rural
characteristics have become rather faint, and any clear-cut dichotomy
in terms of ‘urban versus rural’ is out of place (pp. 487-8). Instead,
there is growing interaction, or even fusion, of urban and rural in-
fluences, and to define ‘urban’ is even more difficult than to define
‘sociology’. Moreover, the very attempts to escape from urbanism
have contributed to its further spread as large numbers of people
who used to live and work in cities are now dispersed and live in
suburbs or new towns. New ‘configurations of settlements’ are
emerging in the metropolitan regions of Tokyo, London, Los
Angeles and elsewhere, vast and featureless, neither towns nor
country. The resulting evils have been blamed on urbanism, but is it
‘the culprit or the scapegoat? Is it not the social system that has
created cities in its own image . . . ?’ (p. 493). In Britain, where in
the past hundred years the proportion of the urban population rose
from 50 per cent in 1851 to 80 per cent in 1931, but has remained
stable since then, ‘urban diffusion’ and the consequent fusion of
urban and rural elements have become more advanced than else-
where in their physical, occupational and cultural aspects (p. 487).

The implications of these developments on criminological thought
are obvious. In periods less sophisticated and confused than the
present, when most social phenomena were more clearly definable,
criminologists could proclaim as an undisputable truth the dogma
that there was far more crime in cities than in the country, with the
exception of crimes against the person where the relationship was
reversed. Two hundred years ago Adam Smith could explain this
phenomenon in the following words, impressive in their simplicity
and also interesting in view of our previous discussion on the class
problem: 51

A man of rank and fortune is the distinguished member of a great society
who attend to every part of his conduct, and thereby oblige him to attend
to every part of it himself ... A man of low condition, on the contrary, is
tar from being a distinguished member of any great society. While he
remains in a country village his conduct may be attended to, and he may
e obliged to attend to it himself. In this situation, and in this situation
only, he may have what is called a character to lose. But as soon as he
comes into a great city he is sunk in obscurity and darkness . . . and he is
vke to • ' * abandon himself to every sort of low profligacy and

In a similar vein, Disraeli wrote in 1845 in his Sybil: ‘There is no
community . . . there is aggregation . . . Christianity teaches us to

ccii-k 545

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

love our neighbours . . . but modern society acknowledges no neigh-
hours .’ 52

Similar ideas have more recently been expressed by Robert Sin-
clair in his Metropolitan Man , who writes, ‘virtue needs the power of
devils wherever there are so many people that nobody is anybody’s
neighbour’. 53 . And indeed, what was true two hundred or a hundred
years ago is true today in a far more serious sense. It is this anony-
mity of modern city life that, together with its greater temptations
and opportunities, may well be used to explain the criminogenic effect
of urbanization.

It is not inconsistent with this anonymity that many inhabitants of
the modern city are, to use Riesman’s terminology, ‘other-directed ’. 54
This type loses its own individuality and depends entirely on others
as the source of direction, but this does not necessarily mean that
because of this dependence such persons will readily accept their
control as a stabilizing force. Moreover, the guidance they receive
from these other persons will very often have an anti-social bias or at
least be socially and morally indifferent.

For the period of a generation ago which he had in mind and for
some parts of the world even nowadays Clifford Shaw 55 was prob-
ably right when he wrote that in a small village community every
member is considered as a total person in the total role he plays in the
life of the community. In the city, except for family and other small
primary groups, this is not so; individuals are either totally un-
known to one another or they deal with their fellow men only at
some narrowly circumscribed point, for example as the milkman,
ticket collector, newsboy or grocer. The prostitute, Shaw thought,
was the exemplification of city life as the woman in whom people
were interested only as a sexual object.

On the other hand, while the social control exercised by the neigh-
bours is a crime reducing factor of country life, in towns the police
will usually be stronger and more efficient than in villages, and city
dwellers may also be more ready to report offences than country folk.
Void , 56 who discusses the ‘two basic hypotheses’ on which, he thinks,
the explanation of the higher crime rate of cities mainly rests, i.e.
selective migration and the criminogenic effect of city life as such,
dismisses the first of them. There is no reliable information available,
he maintains, to enable us to state with certainty that those who
migrate from rural to urban areas are more inclined to commit
offences than are those who stay behind ; they may rather be the more
intelligent and active ones. Generally speaking, views on selective
migration are divided; some writers believe that the better elements
tend to migrate, others maintain the contrary , 57 but all this will prob-
ably depend on the circumstances and causes of migration.

546

NON-CLASS-ORIENTED theories

The second hypothesis, based on the cultural differences between
city and rural life, still remains as the most plausible one, but with
the growth of ‘urban diffusion’ (see above) these differences are
steadily diminishing. Lastly, Bernard Shaw’s view may be mentioned,
who claimed that the quarrels which ‘make country life so very un-
arcadian are picked mostly because the quarrelers have not enough
friction in their lives to keep them goodhumoureff.'"' 4

Statistical investigations of the problem have to contend with
several difficulties: First, when comparing the crime rates of urban
and rural areas we have to consider whether we wish to study them in
relation to the residence of the offender or to the place where the
crime has been committed: the first would be significant as revealing
potential breeding grounds of crime, i.e. the place where the offender
lives presumably helps to shape his personality and conduct; the
second would indicate the regions which possess certain features
attractive to lawbreakers. To gain a complete picture both sets of
information would be essential, although especially in an age of very
high mobility the place where the offender happens to live may often
mean very little, at least for adults. Referring to a period which
nowadays may seem to be the age of innocence, i.e. the years after the
First World War, the present writer 5 D quoted from the Introduction
to Criminal Statistics England and Wales, 1928 (p. xiii), certain figures
to show how greatly crimes against property with violence, i.e.
mainly burglary and housebreaking, had increased in the country
districts outside the great towns, increases therefore probably due to
increased motor traffic; while the numbers of crimes recorded per
million of population had remained steady in the Metropolitan
District and the inner parts of the Home Counties (457 in 1911, 465
in 1928), they had risen from 116 in 1911 to 519 in 1928 in the outer
parts of these Counties. Nowadays distance does not greatly matter
to the criminal anymore. In 1940, it could still be stated that ‘street
robberies and smash-and-grab raids are not frequent in this country,
but whenever they occur they are made possible only by the utiliza-
tion of the motor car’. 50 Nowadays, the number of these crimes has
alarmingly risen, and it does not matter to the type of criminal
responsible for them whether he operates from a city or a country
district and whether a particular bank robbery or pay-roll raid is
committed inside or outside the city boundaries, if only the essential
requirements of success are likely to be present. The same applies
to the thefts of lorries with valuable goods on transit; they are often
committed in rural districts by criminals operating from a city.
Statistics showing only the district where these crimes are committed
—including those published by the Commissioner of Police of the
Metropolis which can, of course, only give the figures for crimes

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

committed within the Metropolitan district— are, therefore, oflimited
value within the framework of the town versus country problem,
although the technical details of the modus operandi are of great
interest to the police. In cases of larceny of goods in transit it is often
quite impossible and even immaterial to find out whether they have
been committed in an urban or a rural district. The great Bucking-
hamshire train robbery of August, 1963 (Chapter 25 below), was the
work of criminals from the Greater London area operating in a rural
district. In this sense, John Mack is perfectly right in saying: ‘There
are in fact no criminal areas left, i.e. areas in which know criminals
are known to reside in sizeable groups. But there are in every con-
urbation a number of delinquent neighbourhoods.’ 01 Criminologists
are more concerned with the general trends showing themselves in the
commission of these crimes, their sociological background, the
organization which makes them possible (see below. Chapter 25) and
the psychological and social characteristics of the individuals behind
them. Very little information on these essential aspects of the matter
is given in the Cambridge publication Robbery in London.™ The
records of Scotland Yard, in particular, contain a wealth of material
on travelling professional criminals to whom local and regional
boundaries mean nothing, but no systematic study of it has so far
been published.

Having made all these reservations we can now present a small
selection of the statistical material published in various countries.
Older statistics, which are often of doubtful reliability, will be
omitted. For the United States, Void ( Annals , p. 39) presents a table
showing the offences per 100,000 of population known to the police
in 1940, adapted from the Uniform Crime Reports which do not, of
course, cover the whole country, but are usually regarded as fairly
representative. According to this table the proportion of offences of
all types, including rape, increased with the size of the town. There
were a few minor variations from the general pattern, however; in
particular, cities of more than 250,000 inhabitants had for some
categories of crime slightly lower rates than those between 100 and
250,000. Clinard presents more recent American figures 03 which
show that in 1954 the rates for robbery, aggravated assault, burglary,
larceny, and automobile theft were far higher in urban than in rural
areas, whereas for murder and rape they were the same.

A detailed international survey was published in 1936 in German
by Burchardt. 01 While most of Iris figures have become out-of-date,
some of his methodological observations and his conclusions are still
valid. He criticizes in particular the differences in the basic structure
existing in the national crime statistics which make international
comparisons impossible. The dividing line between ‘urban’ and ‘rural’

NON-CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

crime, for example, is far from uniform. In some countries only the
residence of the offender is shown, in others only the location of the
sentencing court, which may not be identical with his residence or
the place of the crime. Burchardt’s conclusions follow more or less
the traditional line, i.e. confirming the great preponderance of crime
in urban districts, with frequent exceptions for crime of violence.
Twenty-five years later another comparative study was published in
French by Szabo 05 which, though in the main limited to two coun-
tries, France and Belgium, is more thorough and sophisticated in its
statistical techniques. Moreover, as Jean Pinatel observes in his
Introduction, 60 Szabo has gone beyond the statistical evidence and
tried to correlate it to broader sociological aspects. As Ruth Glass
does in her almost simultaneous analysis (see above), he stresses the
growing assimilation of town and country life and the consequently
diminishing importance of his subject. In his historical chapter he
shows that, whereas neither Guerry nor Quetelet had attached much
significance to the matter, it was, at least in France, only towards the
end of the nineteenth century that with growing industrialization the
towns were labelled as criminogenic; but even then Tarde main-
tained that this label could be applied only to the new, not yet pro-
perly integrated, urban communities. In his statistical work Szabo, in
order to make his comparisons more meaningful and specific, makes
use of a special urbanization index (pp. 23-30), but he is somewhat
handicapped by the fact that in France, as in many other countries,
the arrondissements judiciaires are not identical with the arrondisse-
ments administratifs (p. 65). With important exceptions, his findings
confirm those of most other investigators: crimes against property
arc more frequent in urban areas, but the preponderance of crimes of
violence in rural districts has been exaggerated and it is further
declining with the growing urbanization of the villages (p. 121).
In short, urbanization is only one criminogenic factor among many
(p. 223).

To cast a glimpse at one of the Iron Curtain countries, in the first
volume of a Polish criminological journal, the Archiwwn Krymino-
logiif 7 the English Summary gives the following information: In
post-war Poland, with a population of 29, 000, 000, of whom 13,500,000
lived in towns and 15,500,000 in villages, the highest crime rates were
observed in the western and most industrialized regions and the large
cities of Warsaw, Lodz and Katowice. In fact, nearly one-third of all
offences known to the police were committed within three voivode-
ships containing only over one-fifth of the population. For property
offences, the coefficients rose in accordance with the size of the towns;
for robbery, for example, 46 per 100,000 were committed in the
country against 138 in the towns.

549

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

Some rates for India, with special reference to the state of Bom-
bay, are given in Perin C. Kerawalla’s book A Study in Indian Crime ™
Bombay state has, according to her, an urbanization rate of 30-8 per
cent, almost twice as high as that for the rest of the Indian Union, and
over 44 per cent of its urban population live in cities with over
1,000,000, against 37 per cent in the rest of the country. Conse-
quently, the author points out, the crime situation there is more of an
urban problem than in India as a whole, although she is reluctant to
ascribe the greater incidence of crime in the state of Bombay and its
city exclusively to its greater urbanization. She shows, however, that
in the city of Bombay the crime rates are higher than in the rest of
the state, for certain offences even very much higher. With regard to
specific types of crime the picture is not throughout uniform. Even
dacoities, which are essentially a rural phenomenon of the Indian
scene, are rare in some of the most rural districts. On the other hand,
crimes of violence connected with rioting and blood feuds, often due
to land disputes, are frequent in Indian villages. 00

For Britain, Dr. E. C. Rhodes published detailed figures in 1939 70
to show the correlation between the size of the English counties, their
percentage of urbanization, and the incidence of juvenile delinquency
and adult crime. Although no consistent trend emerged he found an
unmistakable association between these three sets of figures, for
example.

Group I (Urbanization Index of less than 90) had crime rates of 80
(juv.) and 94 (adult);

Group II (Urbanization Index of 90-109) had crime rates of 106
and 103;

Group III (Urbanization Index of 110 and more) had crime rates
of 113 and 114.

The smallest county, Rutland, with an urbanization rate of 18 per
cent had the crime rates of 0-19 (juv.) and 0-49 (adults), against
Lancashire, one of the largest, with urbanization rate of 87 per cent
and crime rates of 0-45 (juv.) and 0-84 (adults). There was also pro-
portionally more crime in the largest cities (over 400,000) than in
those of 40-50,000 people, but otherwise mere size was not through-
out decisive.

From present-day Criminal Statistics for England and Wales it is
not easy to construct a clear picture. Local and regional figures are no
longer given in the published annual volumes but have to be gathered
from the Supplementary Statistics distributed by the Home Office. to
libraries, universities and interested persons (see above, Chapter 5),
and the population of individual districts is no longer shown. To
quote a few figures for 1961 (Table 4: Police Returns of Indictable

NON-CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

Offences known to Police), the county of Cornwall had a total of
4,575 against 8,556 of the city of Newcastle with roughly the same
population. Lancaster county, with about twice the population of
Liverpool or Manchester, had 28,096 against 20,909 and 24,804 of
these two cities, but the picture is not throughout as unfavourable for
the big cities, for example Gloucester county and the city of Bristol,
with roughly the same population, have also similar totals (6,410
against 6,210). There are big differences between cities.

In the Borstal Prediction Study it was found that, although about
20 per cent of the population of England live in rural areas, less than
10 per cent of the boys in the sample lived in such areas at the time of
their crimes; but it was left open whether this was evidence of the
greater prevalence of crime in towns or whether rural boys who
commit offences tend to migrate to towns. A slight, but statistically
not significant, positive association was also found between the
index of industrialization and the rate of failure after Borstal treat-
ment. 71

An informative comparison between town and country delin-
quency in Leicestershire was made by Howard Jones. 72 Because of
the lower detection rate for the country (in 1954 it was 55 per cent in
the county of Leicestershire against 71 per cent in the city of Leicester)
he estimates the official court figures for the former as by 15-20 per
cent too low. Disregarding this source of error, the findings are on
the traditional lines, with the additional observation that new housing
development is in both rural areas and towns associated with higher
delinquency rates. There are more gangs, but fewer delinquent girls
in country districts.

Finally, a research project undertaken by Marshall B. Clinard
should be mentioned. 73 In accordance with the emphasis he places on
replication and cross-cultured studies (see above, Chapter 3) he
presents the results of his work on samples taken in the early nineteen
forties in Iowa, with replications carried out ten years later in the same
state and in Sweden; and he also tries to work out a typology of
rural and urban offenders. His first two hypotheses, i.e. that the rates
of property offences increase with the degree of urbanism and that
offenders from rural areas and small towns are more characteristic
of urban than of rural persons, more mobile and impersonal and less
well integrated in their communities, were confirmed in both Iowa
and Sweden. His third hypothesis, i.e. that rural offenders attempt to
gain the anonymity of the city by committing their offences outside
their own communities, was not throughout confirmed, but the fourth
hypothesis, that rural offenders are of the individual rather than of the
group type, was again confirmed.

551

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

4. Delinquency Areas 74 and Housing

This aspect of the ecological theory is concerned with the differential
distribution of crime and especially juvenile delinquency within the
area of a city or town. It was only natural that it should have attracted
attention many years later than the allied problems of urbanization
and urbanism. While the latter deal with the antithesis of town versus
country, our present subject regards the town no longer as a uniform
entity to be contrasted with the surrounding countryside, but dis-
tinguishes within the former a great variety of sectors of a diverse
criminogenic nature. It therefore belongs to a later era.

Extremely popular in the period between the two world wars, this
problem, too, has for the reasons indicated at the beginning of this
chapter gradually receded into the background of criminological
interest. As T. P. Morris and others have shown, its history goes back
to the middle of the last century. To quote only a few of those earlier
writers, Henry Mayhew pointed out that, in the period 1841-50, two
of the Metropolitan Police Divisions, those including Hoxton and
Westminster, had produced 65 per cent of all London’s criminals.
Interesting is also the observation made to a Select Committee of
1852 by Matthew Davenport Hill, the famous Recorder of Birming-
ham, that among the leading causes of juvenile delinquency in his
time was ‘the gradual separation of classes which takes place in
towns by a custom which has gradually grown up, that every person
who can afford it lives out of the town', whereas before 'rich and poor
lived in proximity, and the superior classes exercised that species of
silent but very efficient control over their neighbours to which I have
already referred. . . ,’ 75 It will be noted that Hill seems to have in
mind a period prior to the age of Adam Smith who regarded that
‘silent but very efficient control’ exercised by the superior classes
over their low-class neighbours in big cities already as a thing of the
past. In any case, however, what Hill regards as criminogenic is the
crowding together of masses of poor people in certain city districts
abandoned by the wealthy.

The modern study of delinquency areas begins with Cyril Burt’s
work in this country, 70 limited to London, and, above all, with the
far more detailed American studies of Clifford R. Shaw. 77 The latter
have been so widely discussed in textbooks, monographs and articles
that a brief summary may here suffice. 78 Shaw was fortunate or, in
some respects at least, unfortunate in having at his disposal, and
being influenced by, the impressive ecological work of the Chicago
school of sociology, famous through the writings of Robert E. Park,
R. W. McKenzie, Ernest W. Burgess, Harvey Zorbaugh, Frederic M.

552

NON-CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

Thrasher and others. 79 It was one of the basic contentions of that
school that a big city develops in concentric circles through a
number of zones radiating from the centre. As shown in a ‘schematic
design of the ecology of Chicago’, 80 the first and most central of these
zones or rings, in Chicago the famous ‘Loop’, contains the central
business area with its big banks, department stores and the most
expensive shops, the city administration, the main railway terminals,
etc. The second zone is one of transition, an ‘interstitial’ area in the
throes of a change-over from residential to business and industrial
life, containing rooming houses, brothels and in Chicago the Ghetto,
Chinatown and ‘Little Sicily’. In the third zone there are the work-
men’s homes, but also the ‘second immigrant’s’ settlements. The
fourth and fifth zones are respectable residential and commuters’
districts of typical suburbia. It was Clifford Shaw’s contention in his
first major publication Delinquency Areas, based on very detailed
statistical studies of many thousands of cases of juvenile and adult
offenders in Chicago, altogether about 55,000, that there was a
distinct positive correlation between the location of the residence of
people within those five zones and the delinquency rate of the area.
In fact, the delinquency rates for boys brought before the Chicago
juvenile court differed in 1926 from nil in the best to 26-6 per cent in
the worst areas. Taking as the basis for his calculations the seven-
year period of juvenile court eligibility, Kobrin concluded from this
that 65-9 per cent could be regarded as the official delinquency rate in
the worst areas, i.e. almost two out of three of these boys had engaged
in behaviour serious enough to lead to a police record. 81

Shaw emphasized that it was not his intention to prove that
delinquency was caused by the ‘simple external fact of location’, but
merely that it tended ‘to occur in a characteristic type of area’ {Delin-
quency Areas, p. 21). Moreover, he stated that, generally speaking,
delinquency rates were higher the nearer to the centre a given locality
was and in areas of declining population, but he admitted that this
radial pattern’ may not be characteristic of all cities, although
marked differences in concentration between local areas could be
ound everywhere (p. 202). There was a higher rate of recidivism in
^ re ^ s j iavin S the greatest proportion of delinquents, and the latter
ended to have also as a rule the highest proportion of adult crime
IPP- 186, 202). 82 These findings were linked to the fact that the most
recent immigrants settled first in the districts of worst deterioration,
rom where they pushed the previous inhabitants out into areas of
ess obvmus neglect, i.e. the second zone (p. 18). And, finally, Shaw
v „ n e ?.~ ec ^ ^at, over a period of thirty years immigrants of
ry different races and nationalities had lived in these localities and
er a while been replaced by other, even poorer, newcomers, 83 the

553

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

delinquency rates of the area had remained more or less unchanged
in spite of all these changes in the composition of its population; in
other words, it was not race, colour, or nationality, but the area itself
that was in a certain way consistently associated with crime and
delinquency. At the first glance, this may give the impression that
Shaw wanted to propagate the idea of something like a ‘born’
delinquency area, i.e. an area which inevitably, regardless of the
characteristics of, and changes in, its inhabitants, was doomed to
produce a fixed rate of crime, delinquency and recidivism. Such a
conception would have been the complete opposite in the socio-
logical field to Lombroso’s earlier theory of the born criminal in the
biological field, entirely rigid and uncompromisingly deterministic.
In fact, Shaw never went as far as that. He was, to some extent at
least, aware of the rather doubtful quality of the statistical material
on which his theory and his conclusions had to be based. He did not
claim that even in the worst areas the delinquency rate was anything
like 100 per cent or that the underlying conditions were unchange-
able; he realized that many other factors beside the character of the
area could determine the final outcome in each individual case (see,
e.g., Shaw and McKay, p. 440); but he did perhaps not sufficiently
appreciate certain other weaknesses of his work. For example, it has
been argued not without reason that even for Chicago the concentric
zone theory was rather unrealistic and that in most American cities,
with the main streets running east to west and north to south,
development tended to be along these streets rather than radiating
from a central business district (Morris, p. 15). For Baltimore Lander
in his very careful investigation concluded that the city did not con-
form to the zonal hypothesis and that in fact the most important
concentrations of industry were located not in the centre but the
outlying districts. 84 Moreover, the statistical basis of Shaw’s conten-
tion that the delinquency rate of the area concerned had remained
constant in spite of wholesale population changes has been hotly
disputed by Christian T. Jonasson. 85 In spite of all this, Shaw and his
fellow workers tried to demonstrate that, with a few exceptions, their
theory was also applicable to the other cities which they had studied. 86
Another weakness of this type of research is that it was based on the
statistical distribution of the places where the delinquents lived
(‘breeding areas’), neglecting the location of the places where they
committed their offences (‘attracting areas’). The need to consider
both aspects has been stressed above (s. 3), as it had already been in
the (unpublished) Cairo study by El-Saaty and in the present writer’s
study of Cambridge, where the nature of the available material and
the wish to compare the results with those of Shaw and Cyril Burt
made it necessary to concentrate on the ‘breeding’ areas. 87 The

554

NON-CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

practical difference between ‘breeding’ and ‘attracting’ areas of
delinquency varies, of course, greatly in accordance with the char-
acter of the comm uni ty and the way in which residential and business
districts are separated. Where in line with modern ideas of town
planning these two are widely apart there will be very little over-
lapping, 88 whereas in older, unplanned communities they will be
largely identical. What ‘Robert Allerton’ tells us about his London
childhood in Shoreditch 89 characterizes the latter type of district:
‘The street [in which his family lived] had a market at the top and
a Mission Hall near the bottom, an old church in the middle,
and a crossroads with a pub on one corner and a shop that sold every-
thing on the other. ... The kids wriggled in and out like fishes,
pinching to their heart’s content because everyone was too busy to

notice ’ Obviously, not much difference here between ‘breeding’

and ‘attracting’ areas.

Another of the inner districts of London, Soho, has for many years
had a reputation for being ‘the villain’s natural home’, the ‘inevitable
capital city of the underworld’, 90 an environment breeding a plethora
of serious crimes, protection rackets, prostitution, and drug peddling.
Many of the crimes planned in that district are, of course, carried out
elsewhere, ‘just as a take-over bid hatched in the City will ultimately
manifest itself far away from Threadneedle Street’, to use the parallel
drawn by a writer in the Evening Standard. In the House of Lords,
Lord Morrison of Lambeth maintained that in the view of many
Continental and some British people ‘this part of London was the
most disreputable place to be found in Europe’, and on behalf of the
Government it was stated that the London County Council had in
1963 initiated 51 successful prosecutions of Soho clubs where objec-
tionable forms of entertainment were practised (The Times, 29.5 . 1 963).
The borough of Stepney was described in 1963 as ‘plagued with vice
. . . fights included bottle fights’ (from a libel action reported in The
Times, 9.5.1963).

With partial slum clearance and the multiplication of new housing
estates, often near the outskirts, the problem of the delinquency area
has to some extent changed its character. Already in the Cambridge
study, undertaken more than twenty years ago, it was found that,
contrary to the observations of the . Chicago school, and in this
country by Burt for London and Bagot for Liverpool, the delinquency
rates for the central wards of the city were far lower than those of
some of the residential suburbs. 91 Various explanations were sug-
gested, among them the small size of Cambridge and the presence of
open spaces and playing fields near the centre. One of the most sig-
nificant findings, however, was the high delinquency rate of some of
the new housing estates in the outer wards, in this respect confirming

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

the data presented by Bagot and others. In fact, to some extent at
least the problems of the delinquency area of thirty years ago have
been replaced by those of the ‘difficult housing estate’, which have
recently been lucidly analysed by Roger Wilson on the basis of the
comprehensive material collected by the Bristol Social Project under
the leadership of John C. Spencer. 92 This material makes it clear that
the accent is no longer on the topographical location of an area but,
almost regardless of it, rather on the atmosphere of the neighbour-
hood as it is often shaped not, as in Shaw’s Chicago, by successive
waves of foreign immigrants but by the rehousing policy of the local
authority. This brings us to one of the crucial aspects of the present
situation. Slum clearance and the large-scale transfer of the slum
population to new housing estates were an important feature of social
policy already between the two world wars. The further deterioration
of these old slums, together with war-time destruction of many
houses through bombing and the increased need for better and larger
accommodation on account of the rising birthrate in an affluent
society and higher levels of expectation in the field of housing as
elsewhere, have accelerated this process of rehousing, although very
much is still left to be desired. Moreover, with increasing geographi-
cal and social mobility the ‘area’ or ‘neighbourhood’ to many people
means much less nowadays than in previous days. ‘The focus of
people’s human interest is no longer, of necessity, where they live . . .
They are far freer to follow their own inclinations and to make their
own choices’ (Wilson, pp. 1 1 and 23). However, as Wilson would be
the first to admit and as clearly emerges from his own analysis, this
happy state of freedom of choice and movement applies by no means
to everybody; the poorer strata of the community are more or less
excluded from its blessings. For them, ‘the housing manager or his
agent, the rent collector, acts as a kind of status registrar, locating the
family on the estate and even in the street which he considers to be
most appropriate . . . The delinquency area is, as it were, the ex-
treme case’, as John C. Spencer, foreshadowing the results of his
Bristol study, wrote already in 1956. 93 To a considerable extent, we
should expect the rehousing policy of the local authorities to be
responsible for the formation of delinquency areas or the prevention
of their coming into existence. Spencer is anxious not to put all the
blame on the shoulders of housing managers; the tenants’ own pre-
ferences, especially their wish to move their children away from
notorious delinquency areas, and selective migration to and from
such areas, are very important factors, too: ‘Once estates have been
established for some time, and have begun to acquire a “tone” and a
tradition, transfers and changes will accelerate the process of self-
selection . . . The team was forced to the conclusion that it is quite

556

NON-CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

inevitable over a period of time that there will be some pockets on
some estates with a quite disproportionate number of tenants whose
behaviour lowers the tone of the neighbourhood’ (Wilson, p. 14).
Something of this kind of negative selection may already have played
its part in the separation of the Gladstone Road from the Dyke
Street families in the ‘Radby’ research (see above, Chapter 22, 4(a)).
Wilson (pp. 16 ff. and 7) divides the tenants of such new housing
estates into three groups, the solids, the brittles, and the difficults,
largely on characteristics not purely economic but rather ‘according
to their skill in managing their internal family life harmoniously in
relation to the pressures and demands of outside society’. Leaving
aside the details of this classification, which might well be compared
with that of the ‘Radby’ study, the distribution of delinquency within
these three groups varies greatly in that there is apparently none in
the first group; if it occurs in the second one it seems to outside
observers to happen out of a blue sky, whereas the third type of
families more or less flouts conventional standards and adheres to its
own subcultural pattern of living. No statistics are given to show the
size of each group, but Wilson (pp. 18-19) makes the important
observation, which conforms to the view of Mays regarding the
Liverpool area (see above, Chapter 22), that while the reputation of a
district or housing estate depends on the proportion of respectable
to disreputable residents, it is not entirely a question of numbers but
also of the social class to which the majority belongs: ‘a blacksbeep
accountant who lives in a road with a dozen solicitors will not give
the road as bad a name as will a rogue scrap-metal dealer living in a
road with a dozen honest unskilled labourers.’ In other words, it is
not so much honesty as status, class, and occupation of the majority
that make or mar the good name of an area.

Another interesting contribution to the study of the post-war
delinquency area in British cities, with special reference to the
situation on new housing estates, has been made by Howard Jones in
his ecological investigation of juvenile delinquency in Leicester. 91
Using both the home addresses of young offenders found guilty by
the juvenile court and the place of the offence, and distinguishing
between ‘real’, i.e. more serious, and other cases, he found the
highest rates of the former in the old city-centre areas, but also in
areas comprising newer housing estates on the outskirts. Comparing
the years 1946 and 1953, the rates for the old areas were found to have
remained stable, whereas a marked contrast had developed between
two of the housing estates which, on the surface, appeared to be very
similar: one had strikingly improved, the other greatly deteriorated.
The explanation seemed to be the higher mobility in the latter, due
partly to the smaller size of its houses and partly to the moving out

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

of the more respectable tenants, thus creating the well-known
vicious circle. One of Jones’s conclusions is that rehousing is no
cure-all; it has to be accompanied by measures designed to stabilize
community life. The same conclusion had emerged from the Cam-
bridge study where the absence of special community services on
most housing estates was noted. 95 Comparisons of ‘breeding’ and
‘attracting’ areas of Leicester showed that within the comparatively
small, central shopping area 28 per cent of all offences were com-
mitted against only 18 per cent within all the new housing estates
combined which covered a far larger area. Many offenders living on
the latter had committed their offences in the centre.

Thomas Ferguson’s statistical study of Glasgow boys suffers from
its neglect of the broader sociological background factors and of the
literature. He conveys no real picture of the distribution of delin-
quency over the different areas of the city — which might have been
particularly valuable for a community such as Glasgow— but he
distinguishes different types of new housing estates, concluding— as
had to be expected — that those used to rehouse slum-dwellers had a
much higher incidence of juvenile delinquency than the other estates,
in fact as high as the rate for those who had remained in the slums. 88

Of recent investigations carried out outside the Anglo-American
countries one of Tokyo might be mentioned. 97 One of the largest and
most rapidly growing cities (at present approx. 9,000,000 inhabitants),
Tokyo is obviously a very suitable object of ecological research. One
of the features of the brief summary so far published is that the
results are not in agreement with the Chicago theory. Delinquency is
particularly frequent in the intermediate areas between the centre and
the outskirts where there are many amusements districts to which
juveniles flock. Tokyo, it is stated, differs in structure from that of
Chicago.

On the other hand, a detailed study of Gross Berlin, published in
1950 (see Note 1), confirmed the gradient theory at least in its very
general outlines, showing however increasing delinquency rates
around the large suburbs such as Neukolln and Cbarlottenburg
which tended to form independent centres from which new zones
seemed to radiate. Moreover, within the various zones there were
great variations with high rates around the railway termini, on allot-
ments and new housing estates. In his practical conclusions, the
author of the survey stresses the need to avoid the concentrating on
new housing estates of ‘problem families’ and altogether of families
belonging to one social class only.

It would mean doing Clifford Shaw and his many followers a
serious injustice if their work were to be judged only on the strength
of its significance for the ecological theory of crime. Their object

558

NON-CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

was, after all, the practical one of utilizing their results, gained
through statistical investigation or detailed case studies (see above,
Chapter 8), for the designing of improved techniques of prevention.
Interpreting their theoretical work as the study of the epidemiology
of delinquency 98 they proceeded to establish their famous Chicago
Area Project, based upon the, to them crucial, assumption that ‘a
delinquency prevention programme could hardly hope to be effective
unless and until the aims of such a programme became the aims of the
local populations’.In his ‘25-Year Assessment’ of the Project, Kobrin,
who acted for eighteen years as its supervising sociologist, expressed
the optimistic view, which characterized its whole work and was
essential for its success, that while the residents of such under-
privileged areas could not be expected to support the established
welfare agencies 99 they might perhaps be persuaded to take con-
structive action themselves. Making use of the existence of a rudi-
mentary communal life even in areas of social disorganization and
apathy they gained the co-operation of many residents ‘involved in
the basic socializing experiences of youngsters’ to help the ‘unreached
boys ... to find their way back to acceptable norms of conduct’
(Kobrin). This ‘do it yourself’ programme was, of course, not left
entirely to its own resources; Shaw’s Chicago Area Project, a private
corporation founded in 1934, assisted it financially and through con-
stant advice and moral support. In 1941 it established the South Side
Community Committee in a district with a Negro population of
more than 100,000; its report for 1954-5 — one of the last issued while
Clifford Shaw was still alive — could already list ten similar organiza-
tions in other districts of Chicago. 100 Can the practical effect of this
pioneering work be measured in statistical success rates? Kobrin is
modest enough to admit that the reduction in delinquency rates
which he regards as probable ‘is not subject to precise measure-
ment’, and the report for 1954-5, too, places the main emphasis on
the ‘new attitudes’ formed as a result of the banding together of the
residents of an area and working collectively in a community welfare
programme. It is interesting to compare the optimism pervading the
writings of Shaw and his co-workers with the more pessimistic tone
of the Radby Report and of Roger Wilson’s analysis of the Bristol
Project who stresses ‘how little the estate neighbours could actively
contribute to the leadership required, and the consequent unreality of
any expectation that . . . there could be any substantial “degree of
responsibility for their community life” ’ (p. 38) and ‘on difficult
estates the residents themselves can have little direct influence in
socializing this difficult minority’ (p. 40). The recent publication of
the full Bristol Report makes it possible to compare the material on
which the Bristol team had to work and their techniques with the

559

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

material and techniques of the Chicago team in . order to judge
whether the former was too pessimistic or the latter too optimistic or
whether the differences between them were so considerable as to
make any such comparisons futile.

Housing Conditions. Closely related to the question of slum clear-
ance and the criminological significance of the new housing estates is
the role played by housing conditions in general and overcrowding in
particular as a causative factor in delinquency. Here as on so many
similar problems the unsophisticated assuredness shown by earlier
writers has given way to doubts and scepticism. Matthew Davenport
Hill, in his evidence to the Committee of 1852, to which reference has
already been made (Note 75), still listed ‘the state of the dwellings of
the poor’ as one of the leading causes of juvenile crime. Seventy years
later, Cyril Burt was no longer satisfied with such generalizations; he
worked out a precise standard of overcrowding as meaning more than
two adult occupants per room, with two children under ten counting
as the equivalent of one adult. Using this yardstick he found that
21 per cent of his delinquents lived in such overcrowded tenements,
as against 16 per cent in the control group and 11 per cent in the
whole of the county of London. 101 The latter figure presented the
correlation of 0-77 between overcrowding and delinquency, a corre-
lation higher than any other which Burt was able to obtain for
the social factors he studied. Burt stressed, however, that if only
juveniles from the same social class were compared the contrast was
much less striking, overcrowding being only 1-32 times as frequent
among the delinquents.

Next in chronological order comes the investigation published in
1942 as Young Offenders, 102 where both type and condition of homes
and also overcrowding were examined for delinquent and control
group boys. On the whole, the position was found to be more favour-
able for the controls, especially regarding the condition of the home,
but the differences were not very considerable. Overcrowding was
examined separately for day and night, and here too the proportion
of unfavourable home conditions was higher for the delinquent
group, for example overcrowding by day and night occurred in
London in 16*3 per cent of delinquents against 5’4 per cent of the
controls. No control group figures were available in the study -of
Cambridge, but a comparison with the Census of 1931 showed
that the families of the delinquents had an average of about six
persons against only 3r3 in the same number of rooms in the general
population of Cambridge. 103 This underlines the close connection
between overcrowding and the size of the families of delinquents
(see Chapter 24 below).

Ferguson, in his Glasgow study, also presents some figures on the

560

NON-CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

association of overcrowding and delinquency (pp. 45-54) and he
rightly attempts to combine the overcrowding factor with various
other environmental factors, but the resulting picture is confusing
rather than illuminating. The survey of Gross Berlin (p. 23), too,
concludes that the relationship between housing conditions and social
problems is far from clear; good housing may well go hand in hand
with symptoms of social deterioration. The Institute of Community
Studies in London is inclined to take a similar view, contrasting for
example the good atmosphere prevailing in overcrowded and slummy
Bethnal Green with the ‘housing estate neurosis’ often to be found on
the new estates. All this is of course not an argument against better
housing, but merely a reminder that improvements in this field are
needed for their own sake, not just as a means of delinquency pre-
vention. The three and a half million new homes which the British
Government is said to have built between 1951 and 1963, resulting
among other benefits in the rehousing of over a million slum dwellers
and a 50 per cent increase in home ownership, are good in them-
selves, not only as a means to some other end.

American studies of the connection between housing and delin-
quency seem to be equally inconclusive. 104 Lander, who paid special
attention to it in his Baltimore investigation, 105 concludes that,
although high delinquency areas often showed a frequency of bad
housing and overcrowding this in itself did not prove a causal nexus
any more than the equally high frequency of tuberculosis and child
mortality proved the responsibility of these social evils in the causation
of delinquency. The analogy is perhaps not quite convincing as there
are features in bad housing and overcrowding which are prima facie
more likely to produce delinquency than can be said of tuberculosis,
etc. Bad housing and overcrowding may easily aggravate friction in
families and with their neighbours, drive husbands and children out
into pubs and streets, and facilitate sexual offences such as incest and
assaults on children. In the Report of a Departmental Committee on
Sexual Offences against Young Persons (H.M.S.O., 1925, p. 80) this
aspect of the matter was strongly underlined.

Lander also deals with house-ownership as a measure of com-
munity stability and anomie 108 Whereas he regards the association
between delinquency and such factors as poverty, bad housing, popu-
lation density and nearness to the city centre as mere surface rela-
tionships, he takes the proportion of house-ownership and high
Negro concentration as. more serious symptoms, at least in Balti-
more; it may be different in New York with its many apartment
muse areas. In Britain, too, it can be argued that house-ownership
may m future lose its place as an index of stability on account of the
growing popularity of flat blocks. Twenty-five years ago the present

ccn-t 561

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

writer tried to compare English and Continental habits of housing in
large cities and discussed their potential effect on female delin-
quency . 107 (‘Vertical slums abroad, horizontal slums in England’
(Elizabeth Denby).) Since then, these differences have slowly been
getting smaller, but it is too early yet to assess the criminological
significance of all these developments.

The present section on housing was written before the Profumo-
Ward case broke upon Britain early in 1963 and, quite accidentally,
led to the revelations on ‘Rachmanism’ with which it had no intrinsic
connections. In the present chapter we are concerned only with what
has, for want of a better name, been labelled the ‘techniques of
Rachmanism’. What many of those with inside knowledge of condi-
tions in Paddington, Kensington and neighbouring parts of the Metro-
polis had been saying for years became now common knowledge. In
the light of these revelations much of what has been written above on
conditions in Soho or Stepney and on the connection between bad
housing and crime seems to be somewhat academic. Judging from
the House of Commons debates and the simultaneous press and tele-
vision comments and ignoring one-sided and tendentious statements
and charges, the following points seem to stand out quite clearly:

(а) The still extreme shortage of decent and reasonably priced ac-
commodation in many districts of inner London (as in other large
cities of Britain) has somewhat been aggravated through the influx of
coloured immigrants.

(б) The partial de-control of housing through the Housing Act,
1957, has made it even more profitable to landlords to get rid of old
tenants still protected by legislation and to let instead at far higher
rents to new tenants not so protected. This has been done by legal
and by illegal means, the latter involving threats of eviction or direct
violence, so-called ‘strong-arm methods’.

(c) The legal remedies against such acts given to local authorities
and tenants have, for a variety of reasons, often proved inadequate,
and the result has been a series of criminal acts committed against
tenants, which shows that bad conditions in the field of housing may
lead to crime not only on the part of tenants but also of landlords.
The new Labour Government is preparing strong measures against
these evils.

B. CULTURE CONFLICT. RACIAL, RELIGIOUS,
AND OTHER MINORITY GROUPS

1. As pointed out above in Section I, 2(h), the term ‘culture conflict’
and the criminological theory based on it cover a field much wider
and more important than merely the problems arising from the

562

NON-CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

physical migration of individuals, although it cannot be denied that
the various forms of such migrations have provided some of the most
obvious examples of these conflicts. Clashes between different cul-
tures can arise without local changes in the composition and structure
of the population and, on the other hand, such changes may occur
without causing culture conflicts. In particular cases, such conflicts
may persist and give rise to deep-seated antagonisms and serious
outbreaks of crime decades or even centuries after the physical
migration or immigration had taken place. Perhaps Sellin had some-
thing of this kind in mind when he wrote: 108 ‘all “culture conflicts”
are conflicts of meanings: social values, interests, norms. There can be
no clashes between the material objects of culture.’ As he further
points out, such conflicts are sometimes regarded as by-products of
the growth of civilization and studied as mental conflicts or as
clashes of cultural codes. They may arise through the introduction of
alien customs, norms and values into a closed system, but also with-
out it on account of the inevitable changes due to the, real or
imagined, progress of civilization and to social change within the
system. As Sellin maintains, clashes of cultures may occur without
corresponding mental conflict in the individuals concerned, i.e.
where the latter are so firmly and uncompromisingly convinced of
the rightness of their own cultural norms and values that nothing
can make them doubt. Sellin refers to the model case of the Sicilian
immigrant in New Jersey who killed the 16-year-old seducer of his
daughter in defence of his family honour. Such cases may occur even
now in remote areas, but with the growing diffusion and inter-
mingling of different cultures, with growing scepticism and the
weakening of our beliefs in absolute values, they will become rarer
and rarer, and it will be more usual now for the individual to be
caught in a mental conflict between two cultural systems, to both of
which he consciously owes allegiance and between which he has to
make a, more or less agonizing, choice. This will often be the posi-
tion of political, national, racial, linguistic or religious minority
groups. Minorities are not social ' classes — within each of them
members of very different classes can be found — but their problems
may be very similar to those of underprivileged classes in the field of
social discrimination. Many of them are not immigrants but rather
the old inhabitants of the region who have been invaded or other-
wise taken over by newcomers, who now form the majority, as the
result of conquests, peace treaties, or frontier regulations. Most of
them have become more or less assimilated, but culture conflicts
often remain simmering under the surface and give rise to large-
scale armed revolts of substantial sections of the whole group or
smaller outbreaks of violence on the part of a lunatic fringe. We may

563

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

think in this connection of a great variety of such minorities, large or
small, for example, the Kurds in Iraq, the German-speaking popu-
lation of South Tirol after the First and Second World Wars, the
French-Canadians, the Doukhobors in British Columbia, 109 the
Welsh in Britain, most of whom have at times in order to achieve
their political ends produced political extremists inclined to resort to
violence. Outrages have, of course, been committed not only by
minorities but more often also against them; disregarding the perse-
cution of religious minorities in previous centuries such as that of the
Protestants in France or the Catholics in England, slaughter of
Armenians in the former Turkish Empire is one of the outstanding
examples; the anti-Jewish pogroms in Tsarist Russia, the communal
riots in India at the time of partition in 1946-7, those in Ceylon in
1958 and previously and, though on a smaller scale, the lynchings of
Negroes in the American South provide other examples. The com-
munal disorders in India before and after the establishment of the
present states of India and Pakistan have been briefly described by
Rao 110 who writes: ‘The extraordinary uprooting of population, the
exodus, the heights of frenzy, and the breakdown of the agencies of
law and order in both the countries struggling to survive, are matters
of history and have no place in a book on crime. But it is also a
history of crime — of murder, loot, arson, rape and vandalism.’

For Ceylon, the relations between the Sinhalese (Buddhist) major-
ity and the Tamil (Hindu) and Muslim minorities have been fully
discussed in their socio-criminological significance by Arthur Lewis
Wood who has also made a careful study of criminological minority
problems in general. 111 Mainly statistical material on the Ceylon riot
is provided in the Report of the Commission of Inquiry on Capital
Punishment of 1959. 112 Faced with the question whether the suspen-
sion of capital punishment in 1958 had produced an increase in
homicide, the Commission, led by Professor Norval Morris, then of
Adelaide University, concluded that for their assessment of the
evidence it would be desirable but impossible to exclude homicides
committed as part of communal rioting, in particular as the effect of
such riots was to:

increase grossly the level of insecurity in the community, they embitter
personal relationships, consolidate and inflame personal hatreds, greatly
intensify individual fear and, in consequence, tend most strongly to raise
the level of violence and homicide in the community. The man who fears
tendt to be aggressive, violent and lethal; nothing more obviously increases
fears han riots of the nature experienced in Ceylon in April, May and June
of 1958 (p. 28).

The lynchings of Negroes in the U.S.A. are a subject rather

564

NON-CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

neglected in American textbooks, with a few notable exceptions such
as Bames-Teeters. 113

All these phenomena, of course, pale into insignificance when
compared with the killing of six million Jews by the Nazis. It has
occasionally been said that crimes against minorities of so vast a
scale are, as events of world history, outside the scope of criminology
(see also Rao above), but mere size and numbers cannot alter the
legal and criminological nature of such happenings, a view which is
further confirmed by the verdict of the International War Crimes
Tribunal at Nuremberg and the many sentences imposed on war
criminals afterwards. 114

To some of the issues here discussed we shall have to return below
in connection with the behaviour of crowds (Chapter 25).

2. Turning now from the crimes committed against minority
groups to their own criminality it is here that the changed face of
criminology is perhaps more clearly visible than anywhere else. The
bias in favour of the biological and ethnical explanation in terms of
race, strong already in the writings of some members of the Lom-
brosian school and reaching its climax during the Nazi regime, has
been replaced by a sociological-psychological interpretation based on
the peculiar position of minority groups. This does not mean that
modern criminologists regard racial differences as entirely im-
material, but merely that they are more clearly aware of the inade-
quacy of the anthropological and statistical material at their disposal
and of the impossibility of separating racial from sociological-
economic factors. While a few of these writers have attempted fairly
ambitious and comprehensive surveys of the whole relationship
between race and crime (especially Bonger, von Hentig, and Exner) 118
others have been content with a discussion of the problems of those
racial minorities who happened to be most conspicuous in the public
eye, i.e. notably American Negroes and Jews.

The very high statistical crime rate of the Negro in U.S.A. 110 has for
several decades been a matter of deep concern to American crimino-
logists, sociologists and politicians alike. According to E. Franklin
Frazier, the distinguished Negro sociologist, studies on Negro crime
began to appear towards the end of the nineteenth century, 117 and
most textbooks give detailed information on it. In my Group Problems
I tried to present a picture of the situation as I saw it in 1953. Alexis
de Tocqueville maintained that ‘twelve years are more in America
than half a century in Europe’. 118 It may appear doubtful whether
the past twelve years have seen changes in the Negro situation in the
U.S.A. comparable with certain developments in other fields during
the same period in Europe. There have been considerable improve-
ments in various respects — in Washington Negroes are stated to

565

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

have one out of every four federal jobs, and in federal, state and local
governments together they are said to hold nearly one out of every
ten jobs, which would almost correspond to their proportion in the
general population 119 — but the struggle for de-segregation of schools
and universities is still going on in spite of the, now ten years old,
decision of the Federal Supreme Court and the recent efforts of the
Federal Government. Violent clashes are s till frequent, and feelings
are running higher than ever on both sides, which cannot well make
for a reduction in the statistical Negro crime rate.

The inadequacy of existing criminal statistics in the field of race has
often been stressed. Firstly, the vagueness of anthropological ter-
minology makes it unsafe as a basis of statistical classification, and
there are in fact very few countries outside the TJ.S.A. where infor-
mation on race is included in criminal statistics. 120 Public authorities
are often reluctant to disclose information which they possess be-
cause it might be misused to aggravate racial feelings. 121 Secondly,
information on Negro criminality in U.S.A. rests on the figures of
arrests in the Uniform Crime Reports and on prison and other insti-
tutional statistics. Arrest figures, as v. Hentig has pointed out, 122 are
unsafe as many of those arrested by the police are subsequently found
not guilty. Prison figures are equally unreliable as Negroes may be
more likely than whites to be sent to prison and receive longer sen-
tences. The significance of the racial factor in American prison sen-
tences has recently been examined by H. A. Bullock, 123 with the
result that ‘ “being black” generally means one type of sentence
while “being white” means another’, although the bias was not in-
variably against the Negro; for example, Negroes seemed to get
shorter sentences than whites for murder, whereas for burglary the
opposite was true. As, however, burglary is numerically far more im-
portant than murder this would help to explain the high proportion of
Negroes in prisons. Altogether there is reason to believe that the
difference between the Negro and white crime rates is in fact less
striking than the figures seem to indicate. However, the statistical
differences are too great to be entirely explained away by stressing the
above weaknesses. For the year 1960, for example, the total of
arrests in the 2,446 communities included in Uniform Crime Reports
was 2,320,635 whites against 1,064,814 Negroes, i.e. nearly 30 per
cent of all those arrested were Negroes while they comprise only
about 10 or 11 per cent of the total population. 124 It is generally
agreed that there is a real excess of Negro crime behind these figures
which can be explained only in terms of the unfavourable economic
and housing conditions, and the social friction and discrimination, to
which this minority group is still exposed, v. Hentig draws further
attention to the preponderance of certain illnesses among them

566

NON-CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

which he thinks may also explain their greater irritability and aggres-
siveness (pp. 164-5). The further discovery that the Negro crime rate
is lower in districts with a very high Negro population indicates that
crime is here mainly an expression of social tension and insecurity
rather than of race as such. 125

Reference has already been made above to the Negro crime
problem in Britain, certain aspects of which— in particular the riots of
1958— will be dealt with below (Chapter 25).

With regard to the criminality of Jews the position is different in so
far as it has never appeared to be very high in general. On the con-
trary, most writers stress their low crime rate as illustrating the
universal experience that strong family ties and close internal cohe-
sion within a minority group — such as also found among Chinese
and Japanese immigrants in the U.S.A. — tend to diminish its crimin-
ality. Against this generally favourable background, especially for
crimes against the person, it is pointed out, however, that Jewish
criminality is exceptionally high for the so-called commercial offences
such as frauds, fraudulent bankruptcy, forgery and embezzlement.
Details for a number of countries referring to the late nineteenth and
early twentieth centuries have been given by Bonger, 128 who observes
that the subject of Jewish criminality has been mostly treated by
Jewish writers, which is not entirely correct, especially of course for
the Nazi period. He notes the considerable agreement existing be-
tween Jewish and non- Jewish writers, which is also true only with the
exception of Nazi extremists. It might be safer to say that there has
been substantial agreement with regard to the facts, not however
concerning their interpretation. In the following reference will
mainly be made to the views of non-Jewish authors. Exner deals with
the subject in his first edition, published in 1939, 127 whereas the third
edition, which appeared in 1949, ignores it. In 1939 Exner presented
two tables based on the German Criminal Statistics for 1892-1902,
showing the offences for which the percentages of Jews convicted
were higher and those offences where they were lower than for non-
Jews. The offences with a substantially higher Jewish crime rate
include, in addition to those mentioned before, usury, gambling,
perjury, bribery, blackmail. Although Bonger’s and Exner’s figures
are rather old they are likely to present a fairly accurate picture of
present-day Jewish criminality in most Western European countries.

Regarding the explanations offered for the differential Jewish
crime rate we find that, again with the exception of Nazi extremists,
most writers are careful not to fall into the trap of a purely biological-
racialist explanation. An outspokenly anti-Nazi author such as
Bonger refers exclusively to the social milieu, i.e. the Jews, who had
once been an agrarian people and have recently returned to the land

' THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

again in Israel, became city dwellers and perforce established a
commercial tradition; moreover they were a persecuted minority
with a strong family feeling. Most German writers whose contri-
butions were published during the Nazi period leave it more or less
open whether the explanation has to be sought in terms of race or
occupation or both. Hagemann 128 considers that, while the choice of
an occupation is likely to depend on racial factors, the specific con-
ditions prevailing within a given occupation cannot be disregarded,
especially in the case of Jews doing heavy manual labour. E. Mezger
regards the matter as not yet sufficiently clear and in need of further
examination. 128 Exner, in his first edition, was more outspoken in his
view that the specific features of Jewish criminality were due to
racial rather than occupational characteristics, but he too had to
admit that very little is actually known about it and that Jewish
criminality was of a different kind in former centuries when the
Jews were mostly occupied outside the field of commerce.

Far more interesting than Exner’s speculations is the wealth of
factual material presented in Radbruch and Gwinner’s History of
Crime 180 to which attention has already been drawn above in Chapter
19 (Note 14). They refer, among other historical documents, to the
Reichsabschied of 1497 to show that usury was at the time common in
Germany among Christians and Jews alike. They show how the
medieval persecutions and the undermining of their social status
forced the Jews again and again to search for new ways of how to
make a living and in the process to establish close contact with
groups of outlaws and criminal elements. This explains their frequent
membership of the gangs of robbers towards the end of the eighteenth
century. By exempting them from the law which prohibited the taking
of interest the state forced them into an ambiguous position which
proved morally disastrous to both parties: it was convenient to the
authorities first to allow the Jews to take excessive rates of interest
and afterwards to confiscate their profit. Equally demoralizing was
the privileged legal position of the Jews with regard to the acquisition
of stolen goods, which they had to return to the lawful owner only
against payment of the price they had paid to the thief. This ‘privi-
lege of the receiver’ made them the confederates of criminals; All
this was brought to an end through the emancipation of the Jews in
the second half of the eighteenth and the beginning of the nineteenth
centuries. 131

The eminent early twentieth-century German economist Werner
Sombart, in his widely discussed and controversial book on the
subject, 132 makes a distinction between the role played by the Jews
in the early and in the later periods of the capitalist age. In the early
days of capitalism the accusations against the Jews were, he thought,

568

NON-CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

on the whole not unfounded. From this verdict he explicitly excluded
the commission of such universally accepted crimes as stealing and
receiving which were disapproved by Jews and non-Jews alike. There
were, however, certain commercial practices which went against law
and custom, but were not regarded as wrong by Jewish business men,
and it was here that Sombart thought to have found the symptoms of
a specifically Jewish outlook. As time went on, this, he argues, be-
came the universally adopted ‘modern’ outlook, and the observer
who would examine the catalogue of ‘sins’ laid at the door of the
Jews in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries would, according to
Sombart, find nothing in it that would not he treated as a matter of
course in every business.

In the light of the foregoing it is of a special interest to examine the
criminality of Jews in the newly founded State of Israel. In the con-
text of the present chapter, developments there have to he considered
from various angles: there is, first, the fact that Israel has, in par-
ticular in the past fifteen years, become one of the principal receiving
countries for Jewish immigrants 133 and that it can, therefore, supply
important information on the criminality of immigrants. While in
1948, when the new State came into being, its Jewish population
numbered approximately 650,000, in the nine years up to the end of
1957 many more, i.e. nearly 900,000, new immigrants arrived from
various countries and continents. In cultural background, in lan-
guage, education and practically every other respect there were vast
differences between these groups, and their crime rates, too, showed
considerable differences. The rates were the lowest where the cul-
tural background of the immigrants was similar to that of the old
Palestinian settlers ; they were higher where, as in the case of new-
comers from North African and Asian countries, their background
was entirely alien to that of the old residents and where a lengthy and
painful process of assimilation was, therefore, required. Secondly, as
the occupational structure of the Jews in Israel differs from that in the
Diaspora, with a far larger proportion living in rural districts and
working on the land, the question arose whether this change in
occupational structure would be reflected in the crime statistics and
whether the proportion of crimes against the person would be higher
and of commercial crimes lower than among Jews outside Israel.

he material at our disposal is not yet sufficiently detailed to give a
clear picture, but the following figures, taken from Shoham, 134 seem
o confirm the hypothesis that a change in the expected direction has
leaf OCCUrre( ^' percentages of serious offences are shown over-

Moreover, the rates per 1,000 immigrants were from Africa 13,
rom Asia 10, from Europe and America 5.

569

the sociology of crime

For Immigrants from

Europe and
America

Africa

Asia

Offences against the Person

26

30

27

Offences against Property

25

27

26

Especially Arson and Damage
to Property

6

10

9

Forgery and Embezzlement

2

1

I

These figures show, first, that offences against the person were as
numerous in Israel as offences against property, which differs from
the usual pattern of Jewish criminality, and, secondly, that criminality
was higher among African and Asian immigrants than among those
from Europe and America. How far these differences are due to
economic factors and how far to broader cultural conflicts has to
remain unanswered, but it is likely that both of them play their part.
The official Criminal Statistics in Israel , 1949-58, in which the figures
for Jews and non-Jews are separately given, also shows no appreciable
difference between crimes against the person and crimes against
property. 135

Even where it is not further aggravated by racial strife religious
antagonism is one of the most dangerous forms of cultural conflict.
The influence of religion on crime has been often discussed, notably
by Dutch criminologists, 138 but also in some American, German and
other textbooks and monographs. 137 The results of such discussions,
however, have generally been found to be unsatisfactory, mainly
because, as Bianchi has rightly stressed, they have approached this
intricate subject from the wrong angle. Religion has too closely been
identified with the Churches and with the professed denominations of
individuals, from which it was, quite naturally, the next step to look
for statistical correlations between denomination and crime, between
the decline of churchgoing and the increase in the number of pri-
soners, and similar external indices. Clearly, the matter is not as
simple as that. In the first place, even the statistical approach is beset
with pitfalls. Scholars who write on the subject will usually know to
which denomination, if any, they belong; inmates of penal insti-
tutions may not be so sure or may adjust their statements to the
receiving officer according to the privileges or disadvantages to be
expected from alleged membership of this or that Church. It has also
been hinted that the known religious affiliations of the members of
the Parole Board, which decides on the date of release on parole, may
influence the statements of American prisoners (Taft, p. 275). 138
When the present writer was searching in the files of the Cambridge
Juvenile Court for the denominations of the boys who had appeared
before it, he found that the percentage of those who had professed

570

NON-CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

to be ‘Church of England’ had declined from 75 per cent in the pre-
war group to 41 per cent in the wartime group, whereas the number
of those who declared to belong to no denomination had increased
from 1 to 55. Soon he found out, however, that during the war the
probation officer responsible for these entries had listed all those
whose membership appeared to be purely nominal as belonging to no
religious community even if they had described themselves as ‘C. ol
E.\ If the same method had been adopted before the war the change
in the percentages might have been negligible. 139 Experiences such as
this may make us somewhat sceptical of the value of statistical data
in this field. Moreover, even if the crude figures should correctly
reflect the religious denominations of offenders what else would they
prove? The statistician Moroney 140 has referred to an American
investigation by the sociologist William F. Ogburn who had found a
correlation of — 0T4 between the crime rate and the rate of church
membership, which would have indicated that such membership was
associated with a lower crime rate. However, when such factors as the
numbers of young children and of foreign immigrants were excluded
the relation between church membership and the crime rate became
positive, i.e. the more church members, the more crime. It now
seemed that it was rather the foreign immigrant with a large family
who had a low crime rate, whereas the native-born church member
with a smaller family had a higher rate. Moroney thinks it may be a
good thing that the Church should attract not only the respectable
citizen but also some of those who really need it, which seems to be
not unreasonable.

We are now armed with an adequate dose of scepticism to look at
some of the figures which claim to offer us information on the
differential crime rate of the religious denominations, van Bemmelen,
who deals with the subject in a careful and detached manner, begins
with the statement that in most countries the crime rate of Catholics
is higher than that of Protestants. He refers to the explanations of this
fact given by Kempe and van Rooy who interpret it as a consequence
of the different attitude of these two denominations to human
activities in the economic sphere, which is bound to place the
Catholics in a worse economic, social and cultural position. Pro-
testantism, they believe, has a different, more favourable, conception
of gainful business activities than Catholicism. Kempe bases his view
on the famous writings of Max Weber on this subject, 141 whereas
Tawney in his equally renowned Religion and the Rise of Capitalism 142
expresses some doubts and regards Weber’s thesis, though ‘one of the
most fruitful examinations of the relations between religion and social
theory’, as at several points ‘one-sided and over-strained’, van Bem-
melen, too, is critical and finds it particularly paradoxical that in van

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

Rooy’s view the greater morality of the Catholics should bring them
more easily into conflict with the criminal law; he rather believes in a
multiplicity of causal factors (p. 302). This latter view is also con-
firmed by Hacker’s investigation of the position in Hungary before
the Second World War. As pointed out by Mannzen in his analysis
of Hacker’s figures there are hardly any substantial differences left
today between the socio-ethical beliefs of the various denominations
and their ways of living, and the strength of religious feelings is
inaccessible to statistical examination. It is not the denomination as
such but certain socio-economic and cultural factors, possibly as-
sociated with it, which influence criminality. 143 This is a conclusion
with which writers such as Kempe may in the last resort also agree. It
would certainly be too rash to maintain that minorities, other factors
being equal, are as such likely to produce higher crime rates, and as
these ‘other factors’ will never be entirely equal, it is a hypothesis
which cannot be reliably tested.

One of the most recent and most original contributions to the
subject has been made by the Dutch criminologist W. H. Nagel, who
after a penetrating analysis of the literature describes three cases of
manslaughter committed in Holland in the present century under the
influence of mystical religious ideas by mentally deeply disturbed
people. Nagel concludes by changing William James’s dictum:
‘Religion, whatever it is, is a man’s total reaction to life’ to ‘criminal-
ity, whatever it is, has a religious character’, which— unless the word
‘religious’ is here used in an extremely wide sense — seems to be an all
too sweeping generalization. 144

In his study of Ceylon, Wood has made an attempt to test the
assumption that ‘religious beliefs and practices serve to prevent
criminal activity’ by interviewing Ceylonese villagers. The results
seem to be inconclusive. 145

C. ECONOMIC FACTORS AND CRIME 140

I. GENERAL AND HISTORICAL CONSIDERATIONS

The consideration of the potential effect on crime of economic
conditions and changes is closely related to that of class, on the one
hand, and of ecological factors, on the other. Although, as pointed
out in Chapter 20, class distinctions are in no way exclusively based
on wealth, the well-to-do are more likely than the poor to belong to,
or work their way to, the higher social classes. Moreover, as shown
in Chapter 22, it is often difficult to decide whether social frustration,
especially among the younger age groups, is due more to lack of
opportunities for upward social mobility or to the absence of oppor-

NON-CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

tunities for economic betterment or to both. And as far as white
collar criminals are concerned they are a category not only socially
but also economically apart from other offenders (Chapter 21). The
ecological theory of crime, too, has close links with economic factors
as clearly emerges from the examination of such subjects as town-
country, immigration, and the delinquency area. In the present dis-
cussion, however, the main emphasis is, as far as possible, on econo-
mic factors per se regardless of class and ecological aspects. Such a
discussion has in recent years become rather unfashionable, for a
variety of reasons*, first, because of the greater attention paid to class
problems; secondly, as a reaction to the over-emphasis placed on
economic aspects by the older school of crimino-sociology; and,
lastly, because this over-emphasis seemed to be particularly mis-
taken in the light of the experiences of the past twenty years or so.
While that older school could easily point to crime as the natural
consequence of the misery of the great masses, the new affluent
society had, it was believed, every right to expect a wholesale reduc-
tion in economic crime as the result of the universally improved
standard of living. When such a reduction failed to appear the only
conclusion to be drawn was, it seemed, that economic factors did not
matter or, in more popular terms, that poverty was not a cause of
crime. In the opening paragraph, already quoted in Chapter 19, II, of
the Home Office White Paper on Penal Practice in a Changing
Society—z paragraph highly characteristic of this whole line of
thought— -this failure of material prosperity, better education and
improved social welfare is called ‘a disquieting feature of our society’.
As a rule, people find disquieting those developments which they
could not foresee and are unable to understand and to explain in
causal terms. Was this failure really unpredictable and inexplicable?
The answer is ‘yes’ and ‘no’ ; it depends on our interpretation of the
economic theory of crime, on the way in which we formulate the
questions to be asked, on the quality of the factual material at our
disposal when we try to answer these questions, and on our evaluation
of these facts.

The following are, in brief, the mistakes most frequently encoun-
tered in popular, and occasionally also in learned, discussions of the
subject:

(a) The ‘economic’ factor in crime has often been interpreted in the
narrow sense of meaning solely poverty;

(b) The meaning of ‘poverty’ has been interpreted too narrowly;

(c) One-sided political theories have prejudiced the issue;

(d) The matter has been treated too exclusively with reference to
western European and American conditions;

(e) It has been treated in a manner static rather than dynamic; and

573

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

(/) In terms of a ‘single cause’ instead of a multi-factor theory.

(g) As far as statistical techniques have been used, the periods of
investigation have often been too short, but where they have been
long the totality of the changes which occur within such periods has
not been and often could not be adequately considered;

(h) Competent individual case studies have been rare, and their
authors and interpreters have not always realized that certain
economic factors such as unemployment present in one case at one
time may show their effects not in the same but in other cases or at a
different time.

In the subsequent discussion these points will be taken up in some
greater detail, but, as they are closely interrelated, not necessarily in
the same order or separately.

The history of criminological thought shows that the effect of
economic factors in the broadest, though often only vaguely defined,
sense has frequently attracted the attention of writers widely apart in
time and approach. Both van Kan and Bonger have presented ad-
mirable historical surveys to which hardly anything of importance
could be added. Aristotle already put some of the crucial points in a
nutshell when he wrote: 147 ‘The greatest crimes are caused by excess
and not by necessity . . . There are crimes of which the motive is want
. . . But want is not the sole incentive to crime; men desire to gratify
some passion which preys upon them . . Bonger begins his his-
torical chapters with a long quotation from Sir Thomas More’s First
Book of Utopia (1516) with its vivid description and grave condemna-
tion of the sins of the English upper classes of his time, the early
sixteenth century. There More shows how the great landowners, by
persistently replacing wide stretches of arable land by pastures,
deprived the masses of the common people of their lawful means of
livelihood and forced them to steal or rob or beg. 148 The writers of the
Age of Enlightenment, too, such as Rousseau, Montesquieu, Bec-
caria and many others, expressed, mutatis mutandis, similar views. It
was, however, only the nineteenth century which, with the gradual
development of modern scientific thought and social theories, slowly
produced a more systematic discussion of the subject. Quetelet
questioned the traditional conception of poverty and stressed the
criminogenic significance of sudden changes from economic well-
being to distress. Edouard Ducpetiaux in Belgium tried to prove the
close statistical correlation between the numbers of indigent persons
and those of prisoners. 149 W. Russell and J. Fletcher in England pro-
duced similar material, the latter underlining already the close con-
nection between the price of food and the number of criminal com-
mitments. 150 There is no need here to stress the enormous influence
which the writings of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels had on con-

574

non-class-oriented theories

temporary thinking on the subject; it is a matter of political and
economic history rather than of criminological history in particular
(see also above, Chapter 20); but those interested in it can find many
details in Bonger’s monograph (pp. 27-9, 246 ff., 338, and passim),
although Bonger admitted that even a book of the size of his could
not deal adequately with the matter. Generally speaking, it can be
said that the progress of nineteenth-century criminological theory and
research has been promoted by specialist workers rather than by
Marxist philosophers, for whom crime could be only a sideline.

Henry Mayhew, writing at approximately the same time, was
rather out of step with the general trend in rejecting the idea that
crime was due to poverty, illiteracy, and the growth of towns;
instead he stressed the professional and traditional character of
crime, 161 thereby in some ways anticipating Sutherland’s theory of
differential association. The anthropological school, including even
Lombroso, paid more attention to economic factors than might have
been expected. Lombroso, 152 while admitting that a rise in the price of
food had a marked effect on the number of thefts, tried to minimize
the weight of this observation by pointing out that the theft of food-
stuffs played only a very small part in the statistics of larceny — a
remark which Bonger rightly calls naive because it ignores the fact
that modem society is based on exchange, on barter, and that
practically every article stolen, particularly money, can easily be
turned into food (Bonger, p. 89). The material which Lombroso
presented showed that the wealthier provinces of Italy had more
frauds than the poorer ones, whereas for homicides the reverse was
true and for thefts and sex offences the figures were not consistent.
Lombroso’s final conclusion was that both poverty and wealth,
especially however the latter, had a considerable influence on crime,
but that their effects were frequently neutralized by race and climate.

Whereas Garofalo’s contribution to our present subject seems to be
negligible, we should expect to find in the writings of Ferri, the out-
spoken Marxist and historical materialist, particularly valuable,
though possibly controversial, material and ideas. Bonger, whose
political outlook was to some extent similar, devotes 36 pages to his
analysis of Ferri, especially of the latter’s book Socialismo e crimin-
als (1883), but much of it is merely an attempt to disprove Fern’s
view that physical-anthropological factors play an important part in
the causation of crime besides the social ones. Bonger was in fact a
far more one-sided and radical environmentalist and socialist than
Ferri; he was the enemy of any form of compromise and he regarded
Fern’s brand of Marxism as based on inadequate knowledge and
misunderstanding (Bonger, p. 128). In his famous study of the move-
ments of the French criminality between 1826 and 1878 153 Ferri had

575

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

shown that the French crime rates for practically all categories of
offences had enormously increased in spite of the great improvements
in the economic conditions of all classes. How could this be explained ?
With better nutrition man’s organic powers are more strongly
developed; there follows greater activity which expresses itself in
lawful as well as in unlawful acts. While there is a great deal of truth
in this it is certainly not the whole truth. Here as in the case of many
other, similar, statistical studies the inescapable dilemma has to be
faced, that as stressed above figures for short periods mean very little
and figures for long periods can never adequately reflect the complex
changes which have taken place in the society concerned. It may well
be doubted whether even Ferri, with all his knowledge and brilliance
of mind, was in a position to do full justice to all that had happened
in France between 1826 and 1878, a period distinguished by several
wars, revolutions and other major changes in government and social
structure.

A few decades before Ferri, the eminent German social statistician
Georg von Mayr (1841-1925) had already published his famous
study of the relation between thefts and the price of grain in Bavaria
for the period 1835-61. 154 Illustrating his findings with the help of
several diagrams, one of which has been frequently reproduced, 155 he
showed that a fairly high statistical correlation existed for that
period between the movements of the following four variables:
crimes against property — begging — emigration — and the price of rye,
which latter was the most important staple food for the masses of the
German population at the time, von Mayr went so far as to say that-
translated into English currency — almost every half-penny of increase
in the price of rye caused a corresponding increase of one theft per
100,000 of the population and a decline in the number of offences
against the person, and vice versa, von Mayr’s views were opposed by
many contemporary writers such as W. D. Morrison in England,
Tugan-Baranowski in Germany (using English material), and Tarde
in France, to mention only a few of those best-known at the time, 150
but von Mayr was also widely acclaimed and supported by further
statistical material collected and analysed by way of more up-to-date
statistical techniques. 157 It may be left open whether von Mayr’s
statistical picture was correct for the period under examination; in
any case now, after the passing of a century, his technique would
certainly be regarded as far too one-sided and failing to do justice to
the complexity of the modern problem. No single commodity can
nowadays be selected as providing an accurate index of the economic
condition of the population of a given country, especially in the over-
developed western world. There are, it is true, still areas where the
majority of the inhabitants derive their means of livelihood from one

non-class-oriented theories

single industry, be it cotton in parts of Lancashire or motor cars in
Coventry or Dagenham, 168 dock labour in Liverpool or Bootle, but
even here determined efforts have been made to widen the range and
thereby to insure against sudden slumps in the predominating in-
dustry. Cotton may still have the monopoly in Egypt and cocoa in
Ghana, but with growing industrialization the picture will soon be
changing there too. Moreover, even within one particular com-
munity changes in the condition of the prevailing industry or trade
may affect the members of different groups and classes in different
ways. Already against von Mayr it was argued that the agricultural
population was likely to benefit from an increased price of rye which
was detrimental to the townspeople.

All this was recognized by research workers in the decades after von
Mayr, and attempts were made to work out more representative
economic indices. The most painstaking and statistically refined of
these attempts was made by an economic statistician, Dorothy S.
Thomas, in her often quoted Social Aspects of the Business Cycle,
1927 (see Note 146), which examines the correlations between busi-
ness cycles and various social phenomena, such as marriages, births,
deaths, emigration, pauperism, alcoholism, and crime. One of the

merits of this study was the construction of a composite index of the
business cycle comprising data on the value of British exports, pig
iron production, coal production, railway freights, bank clearings,
unemployed trade union members (see her Chapter I). This index
was no doubt superior to von Mayr’s, but its construction was by no
means the end of the researcher’s difficulties. 159 First, a representative
crime index was also needed, which opens up the controversial
question of whether statistics of crimes known to the police or of
persons found guilty by the courts or, standing somewhere between
these extremes, the figures of prosecutions are most likely to be
representative of the real volume of crime (see above, Chapter 5,
5(b))} 60 Thomas preferred the prosecution figures (p. 207). Secondly,
there was the question of the time lag; should the economic index
gures be compared with the prosecution figures for the same or the
lollowing year or the year after that? It is here that this kind of
research encounters some of its most serious difficulties, and the door
is wide open to the subjective discretion of the individual research
wor er. The present writer can only repeat his warning that human
eings are not likely to react to stress as promptly as lower animals or
ec ric machines react to various cleverly designed stimuli and that
w n ^. CS economic fortunes of men may show their crimino-
anri , cts P oss ibly at once, but equally possibly after some years
time when the economic cycle may already have taken
inerent turn. 181 Bonger, too, has stressed that the whole past of an

Ccn-u *

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

individual plays its part in producing the motives of his behaviour
(p. 103). What has actually happened may be discovered in indi-
vidual cases through careful psychological examination, but there
seems to be no safe way of dealing with the problem statistically.
Dorothy Thomas saw this difficulty without discussing it at length.
All she has to say on it is: ‘frequently the response of a social
phenomena [>/c] to the business cycle is delayed several years’ (p. 19),
but at least she calculated her correlations for time lags of various
length, reaching very different results according to the time lag on
which the calculation was based. Void has recently used this diffi-
culty of the time lag to show how ambiguous Thomas’s findings are
and how one can base on them conclusions of an opposite nature,
according to which time lag is actually used. He criticizes Sutherland-
Cressey for ignoring this point. 162

Almost simultaneously with Dorothy Thomas, Cyril Burt pub-
lished his findings on the effect of poverty on juvenile delinquency in
London. 163 He, too, begins with the search for a definition, not how-
ever of the economic conditions of the country in general, as was
done by those trying to construct an economic index, but merely for a
definition of poverty. Being essentially a psychologist interested in
individuals, he was not concerned in this research with the economic
condition of the country as a whole but merely with the position of
the families from which his delinquents came. His classification of the
various categories of economic status was based on the work of
Charles Booth in his Life and Labour in London and of Seebohm
Rowntree, 164 and on this basis he found that over one-half of his
sample of London juvenile delinquents came from homes poor or
very poor, 19 per cent of them from very poor ones, whereas of the
general population of London only 8 per cent came from such
homes. On the other hand, 42 per cent came from homes ranking
under Booth’s classification as ‘comfortable’, from which figure Burt
concluded that poverty could hardly be the sole or the most in-
fluential cause. In only 3 per cent of his male delinquents could
poverty be called the prime contributory factor (p. 92). Interesting is
his Table V (p. 77), which shows the incidence of poverty and delin-
quency in the various London boroughs and gives the high overall
correlation of 0-67 between these two factors.

The next large-scale statistical survey of juvenile delinquency in
certain English cities 165 produced no general yardstick of poverty,
but limited itself to various economic factors, such as the regularity
of the father’s employment, type and condition of home. For all these
factors the position of the delinquent cases was found to be less
favourable than for the control group, but nowhere could the differ-
ences be described as very remarkable.

578

non-class-oribnted theories

One of the best modern investigations of the subject which, since it
was published in Germany in 1933, has remained largely unknown,
was made by Renger for the period 1882-1929 and limited to
Saxony. 168 He used as his economic index what he called the ‘real
wage’, i.e. a figure reflecting the relationship between nominal wages
and prices (p. 20), and he found a strong dependence of economic
crimes on the movements of these real wages, whereas for crimes of
violence there was no such dependence (pp. 42, 46). The time lag was
of no significance for the workers, for whom changes in real wages
showed their effect immediately, but it was different for business
people (p. 35).

II. SPECIFIC PROBLEMS

We can now proceed to a further discussion of several specific points,
some of which have already been touched upon in the previous
section and in earlier chapters.

1. The Techniques of Study

It has been seen that the influence of economic factors can be studied
in at least three ways. First, by examining the economic position of
groups of offenders, preferably contrasting it with the position of a
control group of non-offenders. Secondly, by constructing an econo-
mic index reflecting the economic condition of a country or region
and comparing its fluctuations with those of crime. Such comparisons
can be extended to several countries or regions. Thirdly, individual
case studies can be made to illustrate the effect of the economic
condition of individuals on their criminal behaviour. The results of
all such studies have differed widely, but most of them have clearly
confirmed the theory of the multiplicity of causes, i.e. the view that
however strong the influence of economic factors may be they can
hardly ever operate without the support of other factors, and in
particular they have to pass through the ‘psychological transforma-
tor.’ (See above, Preliminary Observations to Part HI).

Even Bonger, who is inclined to proclaim the sovereign influence
of economic factors and especially of the mode of production —
capitalist or communist— and its consequences, admits that most of
the authors mentioned in his historical survey recognize that other
factors are at work, too (pp. 244-5).

Moreover, the scope of scientific thought on the subject, all too
often limited to enquiries into the effect of poverty, has gradually
widened to a full-scale, though still imperfect, searching into the
impact on crime of the whole economic structure of a riven society

57 9

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

This widening opened the door to the idea, vaguely understood
already by Aristotle, that prosperity was of an importance equal to
poverty in the field of criminology— an idea which has provided
further support to the study of white collar crime, although the
latter, as explained above, has rightly been defined in terms not only
of economic wealth but also of social class.

2. Poverty and Prosperity: definitions and effect; can we have it both
ways?

As indicated above (Chapter 20), our definition of poverty has con-
siderably changed since the days of Booth and Rowntree, and the
absolute and static conception has been replaced by a relative and
dynamic one. Man’s material needs rise with a general rise in well-
being, and what was enough ten or twenty years ago is no longer
adequate today. In recent years, this has been a recurrent theme in
the writings of some of our younger social scientists. 107 The concept
of a universally valid ‘level of subsistence’ has been attacked, ‘as if a
fixed yardstick could be applied whether the date is 1900 or 1950, or
the place York or Calcutta. But poverty is a dynamic, not a static,
concept. Man . . . lives in a complex of changing pressures to which
he must respond — as much in his consumption of goods and services
as any other aspect of his behaviour. ... In failing to appreciate this
fact we have lost sight of social injustices which prevail today,’ and
‘Judgments of one social class on another are notoriously untrust-
worthy, and things which are treated as necessary by one group may
not be so regarded by another’ (Peter Townsend). But not only in our
fight against social injustices has this to be borne in mind; it is also
crucial for our understanding of the role of poverty in the causation
of crime. This relativistic interpretation of poverty not only neces-
sitates a broader definition of the concept ; it makes the latter also far
more subjective and more difficult to handle with statistical tech-
niques. If a person is poor only when he feels himself to be so in his
‘response to changing pressures’ then the possibility of ascertaining
objectively the number of poor people at a given time and place
becomes rather remote, and all one can say with a fair degree of prob-
ability is that certain fluctuations of the business cycle are not un-
likely to lead to similar fluctuations in the number of those who
regard themselves as poor. The same is, mutatis mutandis, also true
of the statistical coverage of the well-to-do classes as they are well-to-
do only if they feel to be so and are content with their position;
otherwise they will always try to better themselves, sometimes by
lawful and sometimes by unlawful methods. Attitudes and feelings
are more important here than statistical figures.

580

NON-CL ASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

We are now in a position to assert, without fear of too much
contradiction, that both poverty and affluence can lead to crime
because both are relative conditions in which men, rightly or wrongly,
may suffer from dissatisfaction and crave for something better. Void,
in his otherwise admirable chapter on the subject, is one of those who
still refuse to accept this truth ; to him it is proof of muddled thinking
to maintain that these two opposites — economic distress and econo-
mic affluence — can have similar effects on crime. Would he equally
accuse the heart specialist of muddled thinking who maintains that
heart diseases may be due to too much physical exertion as well as to
physical inactivity or, for that matter, the economist who claims that
the same economic effect — accumulation of a certain capital sum-
may be achieved by earning more or by spending less? Different or
even opposite causes may indeed have the same effect although of
course the causal chain will run on very different tracks. At the bottom
of Void’s view seems to lurk the single-cause theory of Sutherland to
which reference was made above (Chapter 1, 1, 2(c)) 108 and which led
him to the astonishing view that, as white collar offenders were not
poor, poverty had to be ruled out altogether as a possible cause of
crime (Chapter 21 above). In a previous discussion of the same
problem, originally published in 1942, the present author wrote: ‘the
same factor can affect different types of people in a different way, and
if other factors change, it may even affect individuals of the same type
in a different manner . . . events which, as a rule have a crime-
preventing effect may lose this character under special circumstances
. . .’ 1M This was written early in the last war to explain why at the
time so many people earning unusually high wages appeared in court
on charges of offences against property. While this phenomenon may
easily have puzzled many observers at the time it is more difficult to
understand that so many fail to grasp it even nowadays.

3. Various Other Aspects of the Problem

(a) To the statement that poverty and prosperity may both lead to
crime the important qualification has to be added that there will
often be a difference in the type of crime. This has been recognized by
many writers, and von Mayr’s work, for example, was remarkable
for his distinction between crimes against property which, he thought,
fluctuated directly according to the price of rye, and crimes against
the, person where the relationship was more complex. Dorothy
Thomas, who makes a similar distinction, found that the inverse
correlation between the business cycle and offences against property
without violence was neither strong nor constant. For such offences
committed with violence, however, the inverse correlation was both

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

significant and constant. She concluded that for the former category
the picture might have been blurred by changes in law and procedure
—changes which, we would have to add, are less likely to have in-
fluenced the trend of the more serious second category. For offences
against the person there was a certain tendency to increase with
growing prosperity, but it was neither significantly high nor constant.
For drunkenness prosecutions, however, the positive correlation with
the business cycle was high, especially for earlier years. This tendency
for such prosecutions to increase with growing prosperity has also
been noticeable in this country after the war (see above. Chapter 14,
1(g), but remembering the far higher figures of the beginning of the
century when the economic position of the masses was incomparably
worse one might venture the apparent paradox that drunkenness
prosecutions increase with misery because of despair and with pros-
perity because of hubris or insecurity.

( b ) The statistical picture may become blurred not only through
changes in law and procedure but also through other forms of
governmental interference with the ordinary working of the business
cycle and the free market, particularly through the many forms of
public assistance in its broadest sense as developed in the Welfare
State. This is a factor which had not, or not to the same extent,
affected the work of previous researchers. In present circumstances,
through controlled rents, council houses, unemployment pay, national
assistance and similar measures, the worst forms of poverty are
reduced in quantity and severity and can no longer be sensibly corre-
lated to the crime figures.

(c) There is, moreover, yet another aspect of the matter which may
also deprive statistical researches in this field of much of their value.
On the one hand, even in our present affluent society the number of
indigent people is still large; according to the various possible yard-
sticks applied, figures such as four or even six million persons have
been quoted for Britain. On the other hand, these are mainly elderly,
retired, sick, widowed, or unemployed persons who are not likely to
commit offences, except perhaps for some occasional shoplifting or
insurance frauds. Many of those who commit more persistent and
more serious offences are not really poor and some of them are, as we
have seen (see above. Chapter 22), actuated by factors other than
their personal poverty. This, however, does not necessarily rule out
the possibility that the poverty of others may be a motivating force
for them, since the existence of fairly widespread and undeserved
poverty among certain sections of the population in the midst, of
plenty for those who are for the most part equally undeserving
poisons the general atmosphere and offends the sense of justice and
decency which is one of the strongest crime-preventing elements in

582

NON-CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

society. In any case, it can serve as a good excuse for crime. Very few
of those who come under this category are probably rebels against
society of the Robin Hood type (see above, Chapter 20, I, 3).
Maurice Keen, in his attractive monograph on The Outlaws of
Medieval Legend, 110 points out that Robin Hood or the rebellious
peasants of the English peasants’ revolt of 1381 and the German
peasants’ war of 1525 were ‘God’s avengers of injustice’; they
ravaged and burned, but they did not steal. To some extent, this is
also true of Kleist's Michael Kohlhaas. 171

(d) In this connection, attention has once more to be drawn to the
different attitudes to property offences exhibited by different people.
The matter has been dealt with at some length in the present writer’s
earlier books, 172 and afterwards a systematic enquiry into it was made
by G. W. Lynch by means of comprehensive interviewing. 173 It has
become clear beyond reasonable doubt that for such offences as
stealing there is in the minds of very many people all the difference in
the world between public and private property and, within the latter
category, between the property of the small man and that of the rich,
especially of the large company. It is in fact for many a tenet of
natural law that only the small man’s property deserves to be
respected, whereas the other categories of property are the legitimate
objects of occasional or persistent predatory attacks. There are, of
course, many nuances, which have been well described in Lynch’s,
unfortunately unpublished, study. This aspect has, not surprisingly,
been somewhat neglected in psychiatric studies of shop-lifting, and it
will not often happen that a shoplifter when caught will openly plead
in his (or her) defence what was in fact foremost in his (or her) mind,
i.e. that such small losses meant nothing to a big store. This impres-
sion is, moreover, sometimes unintentionally, encouraged by non-
shoplifters. There was, for example, the much discussed announce-
ment of the Chief Constable of a well-known seaside resort that he
would in future prosecute only selected cases of shoplifting, coupled
with the statement of managers of supermarkets that, with a weekly
turnover of many thousands of pounds, the amount lost through
shoplifting was comparatively insignificant. 174 No wonder, then, that
a Metropolitan Magistrate had to complain that shoplifting from
self-service stores in his district (East London) was ‘an absolute
scourge and had reached its limit’ ( The Times, 3.6.1963).

That the attitudes of many people towards crimes against property
have been greatly influenced for the worse by the expansion of the
insurance business needs no further explanation. 176 Thefts and bur-
glaries have been rationalized and made to look almost respectable
by the thought that it is only ‘the insurance’ that suffers; arson,
frauds and even an occasional murder are committed to get the

583

NON-CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

property 'and stealing were thrown by an examination of press
reports on 424 wartime cases of looting. 182 Going through these press
cuttings and analysing the excuses put forward by those brought
before the courts on charges of looting, the present writer found
‘utter bewilderment and perplexity rather than moral wickedness’,
for which the best cure, at least in the case of first offenders, would be
‘education and guidance rather than severe punishment and stigma-
tization’.

(e) A point sometimes overlooked in the discussion is that con-
siderable differences may exist between countries of different econo-
mic conditions and development, i.e. economic factors may have
more effect on crime in poorer than in wealthier countries. It is only
in recent years that under the auspices of the United Nations Secre-
tariat, Section on Social Defence, closer attention has been paid to
the impact of poverty on crime in the economically underdeveloped
countries of Asia and Africa, The reports for the UNO Congress of
I960 referred to in Note 1 deal with the situation, though only
briefly and in very general terms, and the same applies to the discus-
sions at the Twelfth International Course in Criminology on ‘The
Causation and Prevention of Crime in Developing Countries’, held
at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in October, 1963 (Publications
of the Hebrew Institute of Criminology No. 5).

The contrast may not always be as clear-cut, however, as might be
expected. Already Bonger referred to the ‘fact’ — if it was one — that
England, a much richer country, had more crimes against property
than Italy, and also to the comparatively lower rate of criminality in
Ireland, at the time also one of the poorest countries (p. 225). He
offered the explanation that it was not the total wealth of a country
that mattered, but rather the way in which its wealth was distributed,
and ‘in no country is the difference between rich and poor more
pronounced’ than in England at the turn of the century. The manner
•n which the resources of a country are distributed is no doubt of
great influence on its crime rate; where everyone is poor there is little
incentive to steal, and in the England of fifty or a hundred years ago
the contrasts between very rich and very poor districts and individuals
were indeed particularly striking. Such considerations may help to
explain the reticence of recent Indian writers, for example, to regard
the poverty of their country as the strongest criminogenic factor. 183
The position in contemporary Italy, with its growing over-all pros-
perity, is also somewhat obscured by the great contrast between the
booming North and the economically backward provinces of the
South and Sicily. Whereas the former shows already some traces of
the adolescent delinquency typical of an affluent society, in the latter
crime is still largely determined by poverty. Smuggling, for example,

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

is said to be a necessary occupation on the Neapolitan coast as a
means by which large sections of the population could find enough to
eat. The demonstrative funeral celebrations on the death of a
smuggler who lost his life in a clash with the coastguards were
symptomatic of the feelings and needs of the people. 181 For Sicily,
Danilo Dolci and Carlo Levi 185 have given impressive descriptions of
the abject poverty of some of the villages and its physical and social
consequences, including the support given to the Mafia (Chapter 25
below).

(/) The dangers arising from sudden and usually unexpected
changes in the economic fortunes of men are well-known. Such
changes may happen to a whole people, mostly as a consequence of
a lost war, or to special sections, as for example in the case of wide-
spread unemployment in one industry or of inflation hitting with
particular severity the elderly and those living on a fixed income, or
they may be confined to certain families or individuals as a result of
the death of the breadwinner, of illness or a criminal conviction, etc.
Such sudden economic changes are, however, not invariably for the
worse, and reference has just been made to the effect which un-
accustomed prosperity may have on young people.

The criminogenic significance of a general economic depression has
been studied for the U.S.A. by Sellin, who explained the technical
difficulties encountered by the research worker and insisted on the
need for further research (Note 146). Taft (pp. 170 ff.) stresses that as
vast sums were spent in the U.S.A. on relief the depression of 1930-5
did not show its full criminogenic effects there. He summarizes the
results of several American studies of the subject, which were largely
inconclusive. To examine the problem in its whole nakedness one has
to turn to countries lacking the material resources to temper the
wind to the shorn lamb. The movements of the crime figures during
the German inflation of 1920-4 provide perhaps the most impressive
evidence for the havoc played by a wholesale destruction of a
country’s currency. The present writer had ample opportunity to
observe this phenomenon on the spot in the courts, the administra-
tion, and in actual life. The statistical repercussions can be seen in the
material provided by Exner. 180 He shows that what happened was not
simply a considerable increase in convictions but a wholesale and
profound revolution in the structure of German criminality. As the
currency had completely lost its value, and everybody was interested
not in money, but only in goods (Sac Inver te), those offences, such as
larceny and breakings, which aim at the acquisition of goods, rose to
three times their previous figures, receiving even to six times, whereas
frauds, especially insurance frauds, and arson, which aim at the ac-
quisition of money, declined in the same way. The stabilization of the

586

NON-CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

German currency in 1924 brought the figures back in 1925 to the pre-
inflation standard. Exner concluded from this that economic fluctua-
tions of such vehemence have a profound effect on the character of
criminality. In this he was right, but what he did not sufficiently
examine was the corresponding change in the composition of the
criminal population. It is only natural that anti-social elements had to
revise their techniques of committing crime on account of the inflation
and subsequent deflation; what has still to be examined is whether
and how far these events affected the numbers and characteristics of
offenders as opposed to offences; whether and to what extent pre-
viously law-abiding citizens had succumbed to the excessive pressure
of a mad world. This question of changes in the proportion of first
offenders to recidivists is one of special significance in times of
economic crises and war. ‘Surely, neither to society at large nor to the
practical penologist can it be indifferent whether 100,000 offences
“known to the police” have been committed by 100,000 first offenders
or by a small group of perhaps 2,000 habitual law-breakers, each of
whom is responsible for an average of fifty offences.’ 187 Most official
criminal statistics are of little assistance on this point. It might be
guessed, however, that periods of crisis tend to swell the ranks of first
offenders and to reduce those of recidivists. The large increase in
certain offences observed during the inflation probably meant, there-
fore, an increase in the number of previously unconvicted persons.
We shall have to return to this aspect below in connection with war-
time criminality.

(g) Unemployment as one of the most widespread causes of
economic distress has repeatedly been studied by criminologists. 188
The results of statistical investigations in the U.S.A. and Britain have
not been consistent enough to warrant any sweeping conclusions. As
an illustration, the difficulties may be quoted which were encountered
by the present writer in his detailed review of the position in Britain
between the two world wars to which reference may here be made.
The coverage provided by official unemployment statistics was found
to be incomplete; no clear distinction was often made between short-
and long-term unemployment; there were important local differences
•blurring the national or regional picture, and unemployment pay and
other welfare work seemed to have an important crime-preventing
effect, interfering with the simple chain of cause and effect. State-
ments by prisoners on their employment position were misleading,
and comparisons between different communities often showed con-
trasts in the crime rates for which no explanation could be found in
the unemployment figures. The conclusion was that unemployment
seamed to play a widely varying role in different areas and also for
different age groups, and that subtle psychological factors had to be

587

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

taken into account which did not become so easily visible in statis-
tical investigations. Juveniles seemed at the time to be particularly
liable to commit offences when out of work, but Cloward and Ohlin
report that in the U.S.A. the position is different. Glaser and Rice,
too, found that whereas the adult crime rates varied directly with
unemployment the picture was not so clear for juveniles. 180 On the
other hand, John Morgan, presenting an impressionistic picture of
the impact of mass unemployment in Kentucky and neighbouring
states of the Union as a result of automation, indicates that this is one
of the factors responsible for juvenile crime in those districts. 100

Certain changes in the nature of offences may occur at times of
high unemployment, i.e. unemployment insurance frauds may to
some extent take the place of the more usual offences against pro-
perty.

(It) Occupation . 101 Criminology is, however, not only interested in
those out of work. People in employment, too, may have their
occupational problems which are of concern to criminologists,
whether they may be of an economic, social or psychological nature.
There are obvious links in particular between occupational psycho-
logy and criminology, and the decision to discuss the subject in the
present context, i.e. as part of the sociology of crime, may be open to
criticism, but any other choice would have been equally contro-
versial.

Information on the occupational status of criminals is available
only for certain sections. As mentioned in previous chapters, it is
known that the working classes, especially unskilled labourers, supply
far more than their proportional share to the total figure of persons
convicted of such offences as stealing, house-breaking, etc., and the
same applies to juvenile delinquents. Most white collar criminals, on
the other hand, naturally belong to the middle classes. Apart from
this, there is very little reliable statistical material on the occupations
of offenders in Britain, whereas in a number of foreign countries this
is included in their criminal statistics. 192 Even the tables on the sub-
ject previously included in the Annual Reports of the Prison Com-
mission for England and Wales were discontinued soon after the last
war. It is doubtful whether this is a serious loss since the tables were
based on information supplied by the prisoners themselves who are
notoriously unreliable when interviewed on this subject. This applies
in particular to professional criminals and most other recidivists. T.
and P. Morris have collected valuable material on this in their
recent Pentonville study ( Pentonville , pp. 65-7).

The significance of an individual’s occupation for his well-being
and social behaviour can be briefly summed up by saying that the job,
including the treatment received by mates and superiors, has to fit the

588

NON-CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

man and his peculiar abilities, inclinations and susceptibilities. It must
not be too difficult or too easy, nor should it be more monotonous
than he can bear. Moreover, it should not be a blind-alley job but
offer reasonable prospects for the future. The conflict between the
desire for high earnings in early life and better training (apprentice-
ship) with delayed gratification has to be solved in the best interests
of the individual. Any discrepancy on any of these points may cause a
grievance and contribute to anti-social attitudes. The dangers arising
to young people in the past from blind-alley jobs and other unskilled
work have been described in Social Aspects of Crime’, mutatis
mutandis, many of them are still in existence, and with expanding
automation the position is likely further to deteriorate.

With more specific reference to the criminogenic significance of the
various types of work the following points may be made:

(aa) As far as the individual is at all in a position to choose his
calling his personal characteristics, likes and dislikes will to some ex-
tent determine the choice. From this it has sometimes been concluded
that persons with certain criminal tendencies will select occupations
which offer good opportunities of living out those tendencies either
criminally or by way of sublimation. Homosexuals, it has been argued,
may become teachers or priests, sadists will be butchers or surgeons
or soldiers , 103 nymphomanic girls will join the oldest profession, pyro-
maniacs the fire brigade, and so on. The emphasis here is almost
equally on the crime-facilitating as on the crime-preventing, subli-
mating, canalizing qualities of the occupations concerned, but in
cither direction what we have got so far are hunches and possibilities
rather than actual evidence.

(bb) Certain occupations, while not consciously or unconsciously
chosen because of any innate criminal tendencies, may be dangerous
to some individuals because of the special opportunities and tempta-
tions which they offer for wrong-doing: for example occupations
giving easy access to poison or to other people’s property. Doctors,
druggists, nurses, domestic servants, window cleaners, solicitors, bank
clerks, locksmiths, and many more entirely respectable professions
and occupations have here been listed and as any others they have
their occasional black sheep. There is little doubt that many large-
scale thefts or burglaries could not have been successfully carried out
without the complicity of domestic servants, or pay-roll hold-ups
without that of chauffeurs or other employees of the fi rms concerned.
An assessor to insurance companies has described the dangers in-
herent in his profession through the contacts with fraudulent clients . 194
To Cressey’s detailed sociological and psychological analysis of the
defrauding bank clerk reference has already been made before; it
supplies ample evidence of the specific temptations arising from such

TIIR SOCIOLOGY OF CRIMR

a position. In other eases the relation of cause and effect may be more
complicated, and we arc in danger of over-simplifying it. With regard
to homosexuality, for example, Hans Walder has asked whether it is
• really the ‘cause’ of the selection of a certain calling or whether it is the
latter which leads to homosexuality or whether there may be a com-
mon causative factor behind both of them. 11 ’ 6

(cc) On the other hand, there arc a few occupations to which protec-
tive, crime-preventing qualities are sometimes ascribed. In addition to
some of those mentioned under (aa), going to sea used to be regarded
as one because of its psychological effects and the possibility it pro-
vides to cut unhelpful family bonds. The life of a seaman may, how-
ever, also involve the risk of committing offences connected with
drink and prostitution.

Providing useful work and training in prisons and other correc-
tional institutions has always been regarded as one of the strongest
crime-preventing forces available, and a considerable literature exists
on this aspect of the subject. The recent Report on ‘Work for Prison-
ers’ tries to give an outline of ‘suitable work for prisoners and its
availability’ and the corresponding Report on Borstals does the same.
There is, of course, the danger that the facilities made available may
be exploited by some inmates for criminal purposes; as Mark Benney
writes: ‘I chose work in the engineer’s shop to fit me for safebreaking’
{Low Company , p. 239), but his expectations came to nothing, and
generally speaking one should not use the bad intentions of some to
deprive all of the potential benefits of industrial training in in-
stitutions.

{del) Naturally, the offender’s occupation or previous occupation
plays an important role not only in providing him with the techniques
and opportunities required for his offences, but it may determine his
whole outlook and way of behaviour and thereby influence the shape
of his offences. The army officer or diplomat, after being dismissed for
misconduct, may still pose as such and use his perfect manners to help
him in his confidence tricks. Mark Benney paints a picture of the work
of the coal miner (before nationalization) to show how it influences
his character and may lead to aggressive behaviour. 1 ® 0 .

(ce) To deal adequately with the part played by the monotony of
modern labour as a potential cause of criminality one would have to
digress more fully than space permits into the literature on occupa-
tional psychology and kindred subjects. Monotony, it is true, is only
one source of the widespread dissatisfaction with modern conditions
of labour; moreover, it is felt in very different ways by different people.
There arc some workers who are capable of introducing into the
apparently most soulless types of work an element of variety which
captures their imagination and gives them pleasure, whereas others

NON-CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

complain of the monotony of potentially highly interesting occupa-
tions. 197 Many manual workers envy the academic and office workers
not only for their higher earnings — if any— and their higher social
status, but also for what they regard as their less monotonous work.
Act ually , office work can also be monotonous, but generally speab'ng
there is indeed a scale of monotony which rises in a direction opposite
to that of earnings and status, C. Wright Mills, in his thought-
provoking chapter on work, refers to American enquiries showing
that of a national cross-section of clerical and sales employees 64 per
cent found their work interesting and enjoyable against 85 per cent of
professional and executive people and 41 per cent of the factory
workers. 168 He admits that such figures prove very little ; nevertheless,
they may vaguely reflect the prevailing feeling in most industrialized
countries. Dealing with the criminogenic effects of modern mass pro-
duction techniques, Paul Reiwald stresses that one of the most im-
portant functions of work, the sublimation of libidinal and aggressive
energy, is entirely ignored today, and he expresses views very similar
to those of Alexander and Healy and of Adler to which we referred
above in Chapter 17. In Social Aspects of Crime (p. 292) reference was
also made to the monotony of the jobs many of the Borstal boys in
the sample had to do. Even in the case of a dull boy who ‘does not
resent monotony’, the Medical Officer gives the warning that ‘his in-
stinctive energies had not been sufficiently utilized’.

Closely connected with the monotony factor is that of frequent
job-changing, that has some psychological affinity with truancy at
school, the ‘Kindergarten’ of juvenile delinquency (William Healy).
It is common knowledge that these two phenomena are particularly
prevalent among delinquents. Both have deep-rooted emotional
causes which are still further strengthened by certain unsatisfactory
features of some jobs and schools. Various control-group enquiries
have shown the much higher rate of job-changing among delin-
quents. 199 Work habits of offenders, a term of which the steadiness of
employment and the frequency of job-changing are important ele-
ments, have been essential factors in practically all systems of crime
prediction, i.e. the worse the work habits and the higher the rate of
job-changing the more likely is future relapse into crime.

D. THE EFFECT OF WARS 200

1 • In the whole field of criminology there is hardly a subject of greater
interest than this. Of all the crises which can befall a nation war causes
perhaps the most profound and lasting changes, and it is only a
natural consideration that the present spectacle of an unusually large
increase in the volume and seriousness of crime witnessed in many

591

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

countries should often be ascribed to the effect of the two world wars.
At the same time, this is a subject on which it is extremely hazardous
to generalize. Each war, or at least each type of war, produces its own
effects on crime, which may be different in different countries, and the
material so far collected on wars of the past may have very little bear-
ing on the nuclear war of the future. Even for the past, the informa-
tion available for many countries is very scanty. Whereas for a few,
notably Germany and Austria, thanks to the support of the Carnegie
Foundation, very detailed and careful studies have been published
concerning the First World War, for Britain the position is far less
favourable for the First as well as the Second World War. The official
War History largely ignored the criminological aspects, and when the
present author republished three essays written on the subject during
or soon after the second war he had to explain that this was done
mainly to illustrate the scarcity of the existing information. More sur-
prisingly, not even the U.S.A. seems to possess a comprehensive offi-
cial criminological history of the two world wars, and here too we are
dependent on the sporadic efforts of private scholars. The existing
gaps have to some extent been filled by the symposium produced and
published under the auspices of the International Penal and Peniten-
tiary Commission (I.P.P.C.), which covers eight European countries
and the U.S.A., but even this useful work is of very uneven quality
and leaves several regrettable gaps, notably for Germany, Italy,
Russia and the whole of the Balkan countries, all of which have been
omitted. The contributions are written by individual scholars or offi-
cials of the countries concerned, with the exception of England and
Wales, the chapter on which is the work of the Home Office Advisory
Council on the Treatment of Offenders. This corporate and anony-
mous authorship has resulted in a rather dull and impersonal piece of
work, in which excessive attention is paid to institutional, especially
prison, developments, in short to administration, at the expense of
the more important and lasting causative aspects of the crime prob-
lem. It is also characteristic of this type of governmental survey that
it is admittedly not based on any kind of ‘intensive research or the
analysis of detailed statistics’, but rather on ‘expressions of opinion
by some of those best qualified to express an opinion’ (p. 113). It was
not even found necessary, for example, to examine the files of a
sample of cases, prisoners or probationers, to analyse the principal
causal factors involved, as was done, for example, in Belgium.

Of the countries covered by the I.P.P.C. symposium one, Sweden,
was neutral, two, U.S.A. and England and Wales, remained un-
occupied by the enemy, whereas, of the remaining six, five, France,
Denmark, Norway, Holland and Belgium, were occupied and one,
Austria, was in a somewhat doubtful position between belligerent,

592

NON- CLASS -ORIENTED THEORIES

neutral and occupied. It will be interesting to examine the crimino-
logical differences between these categories. As already stated, the
contributions to the I.P.P.C. symposium vary greatly in value and in
length: whereas, for example, Austria and Belgium have only 5 to 10
pages each, Denmark has 38 and Sweden nearly a hundred pages.
Tliis may have been due in part to the varying extent to which in-
formation was available in individual countries— neutral Sweden was
probably in a much better position than Austria or Belgium, but
greater uniformity might possibly have been imposed from a centre,
and the absence of a concluding chapter, summing up the individual
results and comparing them with those of the First World War, is also
to he regretted. The difficulties which this study, in common with
most other researches on the subject, had to face should not be under-
estimated. There was not only the general scarcity of reliable informa-
tion especially in the belligerent and, in particular, in the occupied
countries, but in the latter also the difficulty of distinguishing between
real offences and acts committed as part of the resistance movement,
such as sabotage, destruction of property, and even violence (pp. 8,
14, for Belgium and pp. 145, 150, for Holland). As a consequence the
general sense of right and wrong became blurred, and ‘group resistance
towards crime was reduced’. Christiansen, who reports this for Den-
mark, regards it as a case of culture conflict (p. 40), and it might in-
deed pass as such if we treat the matter as a conflict between the
norms imposed by the occupying power and the traditional ones
which the individuals concerned had been taught to respect and
which prescribed resistance to a foreign invader. These latter norms
were certainly not legal ones since the law, while forbidding active
collaboration, does as a rule not demand active resistance to the
enemy on the part of civilians. However, such problems connected
with the resistance movements are merely part and parcel of the far
larger, legal and psychological, embarrassments resulting from the
need to switch our thoughts and actions rapidly from peacetime to
wartime requirements and back again. 201

Another difficulty to be faced by criminal statistics for the war
years arises from the fact that a large, but undefinable, number of
young and middle-aged men were either in the Forces or, as in the case
of the occupied countries during the last war, deported or had gone
underground (p. 63 for France). Here again this is only one aspect of
the wholesale movement of populations characteristic of the world
wars and even of some smaller ones. Equally deceptive are, for some
countries, the wartime figures of prison inmates which were, in part
at least, dependent on political rather than penological factors (e.g.
p. 138 for Holland).

There are many other changes, too, which make the picture

ccn-N 593

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

presented by wartime criminal statistics unsafe as a basis for our con-
clusions, for example changes in the fields of the criminal law, which
usually requires various modifications and additions to suit the needs
of wartime security and economy; of criminal procedure which has
to be simplified and speeded up; and of police work where the short-
age of personnel makes the proportion of crimes cleared up still lower
than usual. The recruitment needs of the Armed Forces often have to
take preference over the requirements of criminal justice. In some
countries, notably Nazi Germany, the statistical crime figures were
artificially reduced by means of large-scale political amnesties. 202
Moreover, the collection and analysis of the statistical material had
to be reduced to a minimum or altogether abandoned because of lack
of manpower.

2. ‘It is true’, writes Hurwitz, 203 ‘that the effects of war are an
object-lesson in the capacity of environmental factors to induce
criminality in normally law-abiding populations ; however, the matter
is not so simple as is sometimes assumed.’ Both parts of this statement
are correct: there is evidence to show that war is one of the strongest
of all those environmental factors likely to produce substantial
changes in the structure of crime, but it is also true that the general
pattern of these changes is far from clear and uniform. ‘War’ is in fact
one of those broad concepts which include a great variety of types
having certain elements in common side by side with many other ele-
ments present in only a limited number of cases. For the two world
wars, for example, one has only to compare their effects in Germany,
Austria and Russia, on the one hand, and the United States, on the
other, with Britain standing somewhere between these two extremes,
to understand that war and belligerency may mean very different
things in every respect, including crime. This partly explains the de-
tached attitude adopted, for example, by most American crimino-
logists towards the subject and the very limited space allotted to it in
their textbooks ; partly, however, the reason may also be found in the
extraordinary difficulties confronting those who are bold enough to
search for the facts and their meaning in terms of causality:

Scientific investigations into causal connections require the presence of at
least a certain minimum of all those factors which war practically excludes:
stability of the external conditions, an observer with an easy, undisturbed
mind, and the necessary technical prerequisites to the assessments of those
factors . . . Should the world fall to pieces, Archimedes can still draw his
circles on the sands; not so the criminologist . . . 204

In the circumstances, is it at all possible to pinpoint certain patterns
which seem to be common experience in many countries during the
two world wars? The material presented in the author’s previous

594

NON- CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

publications for Britain, by Exner for Austria, Liepmann for Ger-
many and in the I.P.P.C. volume shows how cautious we have to be
in our interpretations of the available statistics. Attempts have been
made to divide the periods of war into different stages, each of them
showing its own peculiar criminological characteristics and requiring
its own interpretations. Moreover, within these stages distinctions are
needed according to country, age, sex, and type of offence.

With all such reservations, there is a fairly widespread tendency to
regard the initial stage of a war as one of general enthusiasm, a wave
of patriotic sentiments, and a consequent decline in crime. 205 John
Galsworthy’s juryman, in his moral indignation at having to attend a
criminal trial in that early period, expressed this feeling in the charac-
teristic words: ‘There oughtn’t to be any crime in these days.’ 206 Even
here, though, exceptions are not altogether missing concerning people
who, through the wartime dislocation of the economy, had suddenly
lost their means of livelihood without receiving any kind of substitute
in the Forces or as civilians. After a few months of elation much of
that wave of enthusiasm disappears, and the crime figures begin to
rise. This happened at the beginning of the First as well as of the
Second World War, and in neutral Sweden no less than in the belli-
gerent countries. There are sceptics, however, who do not believe in
the existence of that wave of moral uplift and ascribe the initial decline
in criminality to the shifts in the structure of the population, and the
general improvement in economic conditions and occupational
opportunities. 207 If there are any emotional factors at all responsible
for the improvement in crime figures they are more likely to be found
in the new outlets for legalized violence or depredations offered by the
exceptional conditions of war. 208 Moreover, the initial decline did not
occur in all those countries, 200 nor did it affect women and children.
In any case, it was soon brought to a halt, although even then distinc-
tions have to be made according to sex, age, type of offence and the
military fortunes of the country concerned. It is not surprising that
the position develops on more favourable lines in victorious than in
defeated countries, 210 and it is equally natural that in the latter the
years following the war should show a further serious deterioration,
whereas at least in some of the victorious powers conditions should
tend to return to normal. For Germany after the last war no statistical
figures of crime existed for the years up to 1948, and the historian of
that period, Karl S. Bader, had to collect the material for his interest-
ing picture from a great variety of sources. What emerges as one of its
most striking features is the primitivity of early post-war crime in Ger-
many, with the predominance of robbery, murder, and rape. It was
a repetition of the experiences had after the First World War, and
together with a decline of the more sophisticated types of economic

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

offences such as frauds in favour of black-marketeering, together also
with the changes in the numerical distribution of crime between the
different categories of the population, it lent force to the view ex-
pressed by both Bader and Exner that the transformation of the crime
picture by the war proves, as hardly anything else, the environment-
ally conditioned nature of crime as a mass phenomenon. 211 This is
particularly significant in view of the strong tendency in pre-war Ger-
man criminology to overstress the role of biological factors. Outside
Germany and Austria these trends, though also unmistakably present,
have shown themselves in perhaps less striking forms.

For England and Wales, for example, the gradual rise in indictable
offences known to the police from 303,771 in 1939 or 305,114 in 1940
to 415,010 in 1944 or 478,394 in 1945 or 498,576 in 1947 means com-
paratively little when compared with the near-doubling of the numbers
in peacetime to 806,900 in 1961 . The proportion per 100,000 of popu-
lation aged 17 and over found guilty of indictable offences fell from
162-5 in 1938 to 149 in 1939 and 150 in 1940, but increased to 201 in
1941, 214 in 1942, 206 in 1943, 204 in 1944, 223 in 1945.

3. Among the special aspects of the subject none is perhaps more
important in its lasting effects than the wartime redistribution of the
criminal population. There is first the increase in first offenders as
against recidivists; a point on which the available material is not as
full as the matter deserves. Moreover, the trends are to some extent
conflicting. On the strength of the information existing for the First
World War and the initial stages of the Second, the present writer 212
expressed the view that in wartime recidivism tended to decline; the
old lag, usually given well-paid work with no questions asked or even
accepted for the Forces, seemed to keep straight, whereas large num-
bers of newcomers appeared in court and went to prison. To a large
extent, this is in fact true. English prison statistics show a decline in
the percentage of men with previous convictions received in prison
from over 50 per cent before the war to the lowest figure of 35-9 per
cent in 1942. 213 Similar declines have been reported for France and
Holland. 214 The reason given for France was the absence of middle-
aged men, likely candidates for recidivism, who were in the resistance
or deported. In Sweden and the U.S.A., however, both countries less
affected by the war, increases in recidivism seem to have occurred. 215
To know why this has happened one would require much more
detailed information.

Closely connected with this decline in recidivism among adult men
is the large increase in female and juvenile delinquency. For women
of all ages the number of those found guilty of indictable offences in
England and Wales rose from 9,784 in 1938 to 13,248 in 1940, and
reached its peak in 1943 with 18,855, which meant a near-doubling.

596

NON- CLASS -ORIENTED, THEORIES

In most of the countries covered by the I.P.P.C. survey the position
was similar or even worse. For example in Denmark, the numbers
rose from 520 in 1937 to 2,097 in 1943; in Holland the proportion of
convictions increased from 10-8 in 1938 to 16-6 in 1943, and in
Sweden it was worse. 216 For Germany, Bader has tried to compensate
for the absence of statistical material for the country as a whole by
presenting a wealth of significant detail which shows not only a great
increase in economic offences but also one of aggressive crimes by
women. 217

The following explanations have been offered for this wholesale
deterioration of female criminality: In the early stages of the two
world wars’ many women lost their jobs; 218 many hasty marriages
were concluded merely to get the family allowances, 218 leading to
unhappiness, adultery, desertion, with their aftermath in the field of
crime. The increasing shortages of consumer goods in conjunction
with the greater family responsibilities of married women produced a
flood of economic, including rationing, offences, stealing and receiv-
ing. The disruption of family life through enlistment and other forms
of war work, shelter life and evacuation added to the mental and
financial strain.

The same factors were responsible for the wartime darkening of the
picture as far as juveniles were concerned. For many reasons this was
only natural. For juveniles war offers no constructive alternative to
their usual occupation, which for most of them means attending
school. They cannot evade the net of criminal statistics by taking
cover in the Armed Forces, nor can they take advantage of the many
lawful opportunities of exploiting the economic machinery created by
the war. If their families are broken up and their schools closed they
have to suffer and are exposed to additional temptations. At the end
of 1940 there were still about 80,000 school children left in London in
spite of the large-scale wave of evacuation, and in other big cities the
position was similar, but the schools were closed partly because the
buildings were needed for other purposes and partly because there
were no teachers. 220 For adolescents the closing of most of their clubs,
hostels, playing fields and evening institutes was almost equally detri-
mental. Shelter life and black-out together with many empty houses
offered ideal opportunities for pilfering and sexual misconduct. Those
who were evacuated to country districts had to face the inevitable cul-
ture conflicts, but only few of those who offended were brought before
the local courts as it was so much simpler to send them home. That
in the rather chaotic conditions prevailing in large parts of Britain
during the blitz the official picture of juvenile delinquency could be
only fragmentary is obvious. According to Criminal Statistics for
England and Wales the proportion of offenders per 100,000 of the

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

population in each age group increased by roughly 60-70 per cent for
boys and by 100-120 per cent for girls between 1938 and 1944. These
figures are probably nothing but a faint reflection of the actual state
of affairs. Moreover, they refer only to those aged between 8 and 17
at the time, and can reveal nothing about the criminogenic effect of
the war on children below the age of criminal responsibility. Nor do
they cover the far wider problem of the after-effect on persons who
grew up under wartime conditions. When D. H. Stott made his study
of 102 Approved School boys a few years after 1945 he estimated that
in 19 of them the war had been the direct cause of their delinquencies
in the sense that they were unlikely to have offended without it. 221
Some of these wider aspects have recently been analysed statistically
by Leslie T. Wilkins in his Delinquent Generations™ who believes to
have found in the official figures some support for the hypothesis that
‘children born in certain years (for example, during war-time) are
more likely to commit offences than others, and that this tendency re-
mains from childhood to early adult life’. More specifically, Wilkins
found the greatest ‘crime-proneness’ to be associated with that birth
group who passed through their fifth year during the war, and he re-
gards it as a likely hypothesis that ‘disturbed social conditions have
their major impact on children between the age of four and five*.
Whatever may be the merits of Wilkins’s able and painstaking analy-
sis, which has been questioned by other statisticians, 223 it has to be
borne in mind that even the post-war official statistics of juvenile
delinquency, on which Wilkins’s study depends, may not present an
accurate picture of the actual movements. What is important, how-
ever, is the fact, rightly stressed by Wilkins, that the criminogenic
effects of war, as of other social upheavals, may make themselves felt
many years after its end. It is interesting to note in this connection
that when the crime rate in France rose after the year 1851 among
middle-aged and elderly men it was argued that this might have been
the consequence of their having been born during the Napoleonic
Wars or the Revolution. Although there was hardly any statistical
evidence available at the time in support of this conjecture it might
serve as an illustration of our general thesis. 224 A few individual cases
illustrating the long-term psychological effects of war are given in
War and Crime (pp. 72-4).

After this digression we might cast a glance at the wartime devel-
opment of juvenile delinquency in some other countries. In France
the number of those under 18 charged in juvenile courts rose from

20.475 in 1938 to a peak of 53,466 in 1942, after which it declined to

29.476 in 1945. 22S In Belgium, too, as in Sweden, the figures more than
doubled between 1938 and 1942/1943, after which there was also a
sharp decline. 220 For Holland figures are available only up to 1943,

non-class-oriented theories

showing a gradual, though less spectacular advance. 227 For Germany
the increase between 1939 and 1943 has been estimated at 140 per
cent, to be explained by the wartime enlargement of German terri-
tory and changes in the methods of dealing with offenders. 228

E. DIFFERENTIAL ASSOCIATION AND
SIMILAR THEORIES 229

1. Differential Association

Reference has already been made before to Sutherland’s theory of
differential association, and there is no need now for more than a few
concluding remarks. It is a theory based on the learning process, i.e.
maintaining that criminal behaviour is learned behaviour. This is true
for many cases, but it is certainly not true for all. The theory might
have been useful and gained an honourable place in the history of
criminological thought had it not been artificially inflated by some of
its adherents who tried to establish it at any cost as the ‘one and only’
explanation of criminal behaviour. Such claims have been refuted so
often and so drastically that it is difficult to understand how they can
still be upheld. Even some of its most devoted supporters have been
forced to admit that the idea that criminality depends on the frequency
and intimacy of contacts with other criminals cannot be empirically
verified. 230 Moreover, there are the obvious criticisms that the theory
can explain neither the origin of criminality, which ‘has to exist before
it can be learned by someone else’ (Jeffery), nor the criminality of
those without previous contacts with criminals or that it fails to dis-
tinguish between criminal and non-criminal behaviour, which latter
can also be learned. Neither these nor other similarly cogent criti-
cisms have so far persuaded some of Sutherland’s followers to aban-
don their exaggerated claims. Apparently not only criminality but
criminological theorizing, too, is learned behaviour. As Void has said,
the theory has promised ‘much more than it has been able to deliver’,
and it is high time that it should cut its losses. It should also acknow-
ledge far more clearly than has so far been done its indebtedness to
Tarde’s theory of imitation (see above, Chapter 20, 1(3)) which, in its
first— not class-oriented — law, stated that men imitate others in pro-
portion to the closeness of their contacts, whereas according to its
second law, with which we were previously concerned, the waves of
imitation go from the lower to the higher social classes. While any
attempt to verify this first ‘law’ statistically would end in failure daily
experience shows that imitation is in fact a powerful force in the com-
mission of crime. In particular sensational and widely publicized mur-
der cases are occasionally copied soon afterwards, even after the
execution of the first murderer, which shows by the way the deterrent

599

NON-CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

great deal of juvenile delinquency; children, it was believed, copied
the crimes they read about or watched on the screen. It was mainly
under the influence of the pioneers of a more scientific psychological
approach to the subject after the First World War, especially of
William Healy and Cyril Burt, that the theory of imitation was re-
placed by the more sophisticated idea of the ‘healthy outlet’, the
‘safety valve’ or ‘vicarious enjoyment’. According to it, the reader or
watcher of brutal acts of violence, of sex orgies, or whatever out-
rageous material press and cinema may choose to place before them,
far from wishing to do the same would rather lean back happily and
passively and let those actively engaged take his place. Looked at in
this way, horror tales and crime films were not only not dangerous
but positively useful as crime-preventing agencies. Of course, this
theory was hardly ever stated so crudely by the psychologists. Take,
for example, the finely balanced discussion by Burt who, while ad-
mitting the deep and often haunting impressions created on children,
asks: ‘Yet, of the ensuing acts, how much is crime? . . . The direct
reproduction of serious film-crimes is, in my experience, exceedingly
uncommon: and even then, it is usually the criminal’s method rather
than the criminal’s aim that is borrowed ; the nefarious impulses them-
selves have been demonstrably in existence beforehand’ (pp. 144-5).
This was to become the fairly generally accepted formula : it is not the
motives but merely the methods of the gangster that are copied from
the movies; the criminal disposition was already there before, and the
film has merely provided the external stimulus. 230 Burt found only
four or five cases in his material where the crime seemed to be directly
inspired by the cinema, and they were mostly cases of dull or defective
youngsters. In short, the criminogenic emphasis was shifted from the
imitative to other, it was thought less sinister, aspects, mainly to the
obvious incentive provided by the movie craze to steal the money
needed for the ticket. In addition, it was stressed, however, that even
if no straightforward copying could be discovered there might well
exist far more subtle side- or after-effects, again well described by
Burt: the distorted view of life in society which is presented to the
young cinema-goer, with its entirely wrong scale of values which
might exert its evil influence later in life. In any case, it is encouraging
to see that leading child psychiatrists such as the late Lucien Bovet 237
object to the all too complacent views propagated by some of the
adherents of the theory of the safety valve which, he writes, has in the
light of present-day knowledge as much scientific backing as the
equally uncritical theory of imitation.

A few interesting case histories have been given by psychiatrists,
for example by Frederic Wertham in his Dark Legend? 38 His young
Italian-American hero Gino had, on the night before killing his

601

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

mother, seen a film containing several elements which seemed to him
to reflect his own problems. Wertham, reflecting on certain famous
instances in world literature such as Orestes hearing the Greek Chorus
recite the story of his father’s death and his mother’s re-marriage,
concludes that, while anti-social impulses do not originate in this way,
once they exist they may receive an added impetus by way of identifi-
cation with the hero of a film or novel or press report.

These quotations show that there is no clear-cut line of transition
from the second to the third stage, which latter is characterized by the
appearance on the scene of the sociologists and social psychologists
on the theoretical and of television on the practical side. Statisticians
and sociologists have analysed the contents of films and also com-
pared the interest shown by delinquents and non-delinquents in the
movies and television. It was found, for example, that out of 500
motion pictures analysed in the years 1920, 1925 and 1930 about
25-30 per cent had crime as their major theme 230 and also that delin-
quents exhibited a far greater interest in the movies and went to the
cinema far fnore often than non-delinquents. 240 With regard to the
first, the film industry replied that, as crime played such a dominant
role in our society, they as faithful and impartial recorders of modern
life had the moral and social duty to give it its proper share in the
contents of the movies. To this it might be retorted that if it should be
found that boredom, hanging about and doing nothing was an im-
portant feature of society — as they actually are — the film makers
would be most reluctant to give them their true share as doing so
might be bad business. It is similar with the time-worn argument that
the industry has to give people the kind of entertainment they want;
here as so often it is doubtful which came first, the wish or its alleged
fulfilment. With regard to the more frequent cinema attendance of
delinquents two doubts have to be stressed: first, as far as statistics
are based on the delinquents’ and non-delinquents’ own stories the
latter may, as Grygier has convincingly shown (Note 235), easily be
falsified by bad memory and possibly also by the wish of non-delin-
quents to conceal the truth if they believe it to be unwelcome to the
interviewer.

The principal objections to crime pictures, as seen from a point of
view which tries to do justice to both, the theory of imitation and that
of the healthy outlet, are thus in brief these:

(a) There is far too much crime on the screen, and in particular too
much violence, which goes against even the present statistical pro-
portion of such crimes;

(b) the actual psychological and sociological factors behind crime
are often distorted in favour of cheap sensationalism or entirely
ignored;

602

NON-CLASS -ORIENTED THEORIES

(c) the criminal is often pictured too attractively and as a hero;

(d) the crime-fighting agencies, on the other hand, are often shown
to be weak, stupid or brutal, although in this respect there have been
some improvements of late and in particular the police have been
given a fairer chance now to become slightly less unpopular and
prove themselves to be less inefficient than before (‘Z Cars’ and
‘Dixon of Dock Green’);

(e) even so, the final outcome of the crime films is often — though
possibly not more often than in real life — too favourable to the
criminal; crime still pays too well. Where punishment does follow it
is often brutal and not in conformity with modem ideas, but it has to
be admitted that the reformative elements in a modern penal system
— whatever they may be — are much more difficult to present on the
screen than old-fashioned brutality.

Already 20 or 25 years ago it was claimed that the Hollywood
gangster film was dead, that the gangster had been replaced by the
‘G’ man as the hero of the film. 241 In 1947 the American Motion Pic-
ture Association decided to prohibit the production and exhibition of
films picturing the lives and exploits of notorious underworld figures,
‘unless the character shown in the picture is punished for the crimes
shown in the film as committed by him’. 242 It may be doubtful how
far this ruling has been effective. Moreover, it has been argued that
especially younger children are unable to take in the story of a picture
as a whole; what impresses and influences them is rather an isolated
episode, and if this is bad its effect cannot be eliminated or toned
down by a moral outcome artificially tacked on to satisfy the
critics. 213 It is of course true that careful distinctions have to be made
between the potential effects of a crime picture on younger and on
older children, on boys and girls, on stable and on constitutionally
unstable persons. But more or less for all of them the following words
seem to be true: ‘Our social life is . . . full of problems of the most
serious and urgent nature, social and personal; why is it necessary
that we create artifically nightmares and cruel psychological refine-
ments ? Where does this constant drugging lead us ? It must naturally
make us unfit to master our lives as they are.’ 244 However, these are
unpopular words.

With the coming of the television age the whole story of the crime
film seems to be repeating itself, with the difference of course that
children can now watch day after day for hours without having to
worry about the entrance money. Research on the subject has already
been done and more is on the way. 245 Dr, Hilde Himmelweit, whose
Nuffield Foundation study has broken fresh ground, has been repor-
ted as stating that psychological tests had shown that scenes of vio-
lence on television did no good in spite of the moral which might be

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

intended by the producer and that they did not help young audiences
to get rid of violent tendencies; on the other hand, in the absence of
control groups it could not be positively said that they did harm.
There might, however, be a trigger action on a psychologically dis-
turbed child. 240 Less cautiously, the National Association of Probation
Officers criticizes the ‘continuous display of violence* which, they
believe, tempts ‘the less responsible members of society of all ages to
follow an easy lead into anti-social behaviour’. 247 The General
Secretary of the Council for Children’s Welfare stresses that the sub-
ject of violence cannot be separated from the general problem of
quality and that it is the ‘depressing lack of vision’ in some television
programmes that leads to the introduction of violence ‘to give it
spice’. 248

An interesting discussion was carried on in The Times of August
1964, under the heading ‘Blind Eye on Murder’, where watching
television was held responsible for the behaviour of a crowd of on-
lookers watching a murder committed before their eyes without any
of them making the slightest attempt to assist the victim. Not without
good reason it was contended that the constant watching of scenes of
violence makes adults and children indifferent (e.g. The Times ,
1 8.8.1964). While television is certainly not solely responsible it bears
a great deal of responsibility in such matters. Perhaps more important
than such views of laymen, which are all too often cast aside as im-
material, is the fact that professional psychologists seem to be more
and more turning away from the soothing theory of catharsis. Pro-
fessor Franco Ferracuti, in a paper presented to the Forty-first
Annual Meeting of the American Orthopsychiatric Association,
March 1964, refers to several recent American investigations in
which that hypothesis was not confirmed. ‘It seems’, he writes, ‘that
portrayed violence is not as innocuous, or even beneficial, as the pro-
ponents of the catharsis hypothesis maintained.’ 249 All these are
under- rather than over-statements of a truly deplorable situation.

Legislative action was taken in 1955 against ‘horror comics’ to
make it an offence to print, publish or sell ‘pictorial publications
harmful to children and young persons’. Under the Children and
Young Persons (Harmful Publications) Act, 1955, the maximum
penalty is four months’ imprisonment or a fine of £100 or both.

The quite excessive amount of space devoted to crime stories in
certain sections of the press and the glamorization of crime which goes
with it are too well-known to require any further comments. Clinard,
whose book was published as recently as 1957, has still a high opinion
of the factual, verifiable manner in which crime reporting is generally
done in Britain which he compares favourably with the press of his
own country, 250 and for the majority of British newspapers this is

NON-CLASS-ORIENTED THEORIES

true even today. What has recently incensed responsible public
opinion more than anything else against the less scrupulous excep-
tions is the way in which they have handled the Profumo-Ward case
in 1963 and its ramifications. In particular the payment of exorbitant
sums of money to criminals or other socially not very desirable ele-
ments for their ‘confessions’ or memoirs, an evil practised of course
also long before that case, has been one of the most deplorable fea-
tures of the present scene. Not without justification, Lord Shawcross,
while protesting against any form of press censorship, has written:

Tiie subsequent advertisement, photographs and general glamorization of
the women involved (without which they would be less likely to reap a rich
financial harvest) must cause millions of good and honest, and one may
add, often more beautiful young women who daily work for modest wages
in our offices, shops and factories to wonder what sort of moral values it
is that all this publicity is intended to support . 251

The criminogenic, as distinct from the moral, effect of all this
lowering of values is of course even more difficult to assess, but in the
long run it is unlikely to be negligible. With such reflections we are
returning to one of the main topics of Chapter 19.

Chapter 24

GROUPS AS FACTORS IN CRIME I
A. PRIMARY GROUPS: FAMILY AND SCHOOL

Introductory Remarks

The social group is one of the most important sociological concepts
affecting criminology, but there is no need here to go more fully into
the details of its very comprehensive literature. 1 There are many defi-
nitions of the group, for example ‘a plurality of persons who interact
with one another in a given context more than they interact with any-
one else’. 2 In Merton’s definition (p. 285) this element of the compara-
tive frequency of the interaction is not present. While every individual
is born into a group, the number of groups, to which an individual
may belong, will differ greatly according to his status and functions
in society and also in accordance with his personal inclinations.
Groups are not identical with classes, as they may consist of members
belonging to very different social classes, but the latter may be
regarded as ‘quasi-groups’ (see above. Chapter 20). Groups are either
primary or secondary ones. The former, corresponding to the German
Gemeinschaft, are small, intimate, face-to-face associations such as
the family, the small school class, the small gang, or a small peasant
community, whereas secondary groups are larger and more im-
personal, such as the nation, the army, church, trade union, large
town; it is the German Gesellschaft, to use the two terms made famous
by the German sociologist Ferdinand Toennies. 3

In recent years, research on small groups has become highly popu-
lar, especially in the U.S.A., 4 and criminology and penology have
benefited from it. In particular the dynamics and problems of the
behaviour of inmates of penal and reformatory institutions are now
better understood as the result of these researches. 5 It is here that
sodometric studies can also be of great value, 6 as can psycho-analytic
studies or group psycho-therapy. 7 In the present chapter we shall be
concerned with a few of the most important primary groups, notably
the family, whereas gangs, though usually also small primary groups,
will be dealt with in the following chapter together with secondary
groups such as the crowd.

606

GROUPS AS FACTORS IN CRIME

Another distinction frequently made by sociologists is that between
in-groups and out-groups, i.e. inside each group there is a feeling of
cohesion and of hostility towards non-members and particularly mem-
bers of other groups, the outsiders, a distinction the utility of -which
has been questioned by Merton. I. * * * * * * 8

A concept closely connected with this and even more popular in
modern sociology and so thoroughly dissected that it is in danger of
becoming meaningless is the concept of the reference group. Such
groups are, as Merton writes, 9 * in principle almost innumerable, as
hot only those groups of which the individual is a member but also
those to which he does not belong can serve as ‘points of reference
for shaping one’s attitudes, evaluations and behaviour’. In other
words, the existence of groups of any kind will, regardless of the
nature of their relationship to the individual, influence his behaviour.
It can be argued that there is nothing very new in all this, to which
Merton replies that such a negative view ignores ‘the distinctive ideas
in this developing theory’ (pp. 282-3). We are inclined to agree with
him, hoping that future criminologists will be able to make better use
of this concept than has so far been done. According to ShcriP 0 the
need for it arose from the wish exactly to pinpoint those groups which
supply the ‘main anchorage for experience and behaviour’, a desire
no less strong in criminology than in other social sciences.

The existence of a multiplicity of social groups with a corresponding
variety of standards of values, attitudes and conduct is of the greatest
criminological significance on account of the likelihood of conflicts
arising from such a variety. One has to conclude that groups may have
a protective, crime-preventing, as well as a crime-producing effect.
This will become clearer from the following discussion of the role
played by a number of groups. On the whole, primary groups arouse
stronger feelings of loyalty than secondary ones, but this is not in-
variably so as has sometimes been experienced in conflicts between
the family and the state or the church.

I. THE FAMILY 11

The family has been called many things by many people: a ‘trans-

mission belt for the diffusion of cultural standards to the oncoming

generation’ (Merton), the ‘psychological agent of society’ (Fromm),

the ‘shock-absorber of society’ (Aichborn), thus mainly stressing its

valuable, constructive qualities. 12 The criminologist, while fully aware

of the latter, has also to take account of certain less desirable elements

of family life.

In common with other observers he will be aware of the dangers

easily created, for example, by the sometimes extreme and one-sided

607

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

solicitude of parents for their offspring at the expense of the interests
of society at large. In such cases, offences against the latter are re-
garded as justifiable if committed for the sake of the family, just as
international crimes are glorified if they seem to be required for the
benefit of one’s own nation. For too many people, charity not only
begins, it also ends at home. The consequence is that conflicting views
have emerged, depending on whether the main emphasis is on the
constructive or on the destructive side of the subject. Such differences
of emphasis cannot, however, detract from the overwhelming im-
portance of the family as a unique force in the life of the individual,
potentially determining the course of his whole life for good or evil.

As pointed out above, in spite of the considerable progress made
in recent years in reaching a closer understanding between the psycho-
logical and sociological ways of approaching family problems, an
unresolved residue will inevitably remain, the psychologist being
inclined to place the emphasis mainly on the static and immutable
nature of family life and the sociologist stressing rather its dyna-
mic, changing aspects.

Moreover, even apart from such basic differences in approach, it is
clear that the family does not play the same role in different types of
cultures, periods or social classes. Family structures and situations
which produce conflicts in one cultural setting may not do so in
another. Even in our western civilization of today illegitimate birth is
no longer as stigmatizing as it used to be a hundred or fifty years ago,
and in the West Indies it has apparently never been regarded as a mis-
fortune. ‘The prevailing type of West Indian family’, writes Simey,
who has made a first-hand study of the subject, ‘is very loose in
organization. It is rarely founded on the ceremony of marriage . . .
illegitimacy rates vary from 60-75 per cent of total births’, but this is
to some extent counterbalanced by the institution of ‘faithful con-
cubinage’. 13

Anthropologists have collected masses of material to demonstrate
the differences in family structure and relations existing in various
parts of the globe, and as one of them has said, they have occasionally
‘tended to overemphasize the differences at the expense of the similari-
ties’. 14 Granting this tendency, it cannot be denied, however, that the
variations may often be very striking at one time or another, even in
European societies. One has only to refer to the many changes in the
Soviet Russian attitude towards the family or to the attempts of the
Nazi regime to subordinate the family and its values unconditionally
to the demands of the totalitarian state. 15 The Hindu ‘joint-family’ is
one of the most striking examples of a family organization funda-
mentally different from the European family structure, 10 and the case
of Khuman Singh, the Indian fratricide, shows how its peculiar

608

GROUPS AS FACTORS IN CRIME

features can occasionally play their part in the interpretation of
crime . 17

For the normal family in a normal democratic western society it is
true to say that the child learns to behave socially not so much out of
respect for the abstract, at best only theoretically understood, state
code of conduct, but out of love for his parents, and if this latter in-
centive should not prove strong enough the other is almost certain to
break down . 18 Therefore, according to this view the whole, slow and
often painful, process of the child’s socialization depends on his early
relationship to his parents. In an American investigation of the
‘correlation between the moral judgments of children and their
associates’ it was found that these judgments were derived from those
of the parents far more than from anybody else . 19 The absorbing
interest in family matters, natural in children, whether it indicates
dependence, loyalty, acceptance or criticism and antagonism, is very
often carried over into adolescence, though with growing age feelings
are bound to become more strained and complex , 20 until in middle
age they tend to be more detached. The dominant place held by the
family in working-class life has been described in many books; its
core ‘is embodied in the idea of, first, the family and, second, the
neighbourhood ’. 21 While the social training of the child begins within
the family it is dangerous to limit it to the narrow family circle for too
long instead of allowing the child to try himself and the code of
values implanted by his parents in the life of wider and more diversi-
fied groups . 22 The ‘peer-group’ in particular is, and should be, a
powerful competitor to the family. Even so, however, it is often
striking to observe how, especially in the case of delinquents, right up
to adult life their whole being is, for good or ill, centred round the
family. When talking to boys in Approved Schools and Borstals the
present writer was often struck by their excessive and almost exclu-
sive interest in matters concerning their families, and similar observa-
tions were made by Kate Friedlander , 23 Stott , 24 and others.

In the following a survey will be made of the principal facets of
family life and structure which have been regarded as potentially
criminogenic. It has become customary to distinguish criminogenic
factors present in families which are structurally normal from those
present in families whose structure deviates from the norm.

While accepting this distinction we have to make it clear that our
growing awareness of the preponderance of psychological over purely
structural, i.e. basically external, factors is increasingly leading to a
state of affairs where this latter category becomes rather empty and
meaningless.

ccn — o

609

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

1. Structurally Normal Families

Here both parents are alive and live together with their offspring.
Difficulties potentially leading to delinquency may here arise from
faults in the roles played by the individual members of the family,
from the nature of their relations to one another, and from the size of
the family. Barbara Wootton, in her examination of what she calls
‘twelve criminological hypotheses’, 25 deals with a few of these factors
in her analysis of twenty-one studies spread over a period of forty
years. One of these twelve factors is:

(a) The Size of the Family. Here Wootton finds that, in spite of a
certain vagueness in the definitions of ‘size’ used in these investiga-
tions — does it include only those children who are still alive? does it
exclude half- or step-siblings? and so on — the total picture shows
fairly clearly that the delinquents come from larger families than the
non-delinquents. Information on the latter has usually been derived
from matched control groups. There is no need to go into details,
especially as the same result has throughout been reached in studies
not mentioned by Wootton, whether they refer to English or foreign,
old or recent material. 20 More difficult, however, than to establish the
facts is to interpret their meaning. First, could we simply dismiss
those findings on the ground that as most delinquents come from the
lowest and poorest classes of the population who are also known to
have the largest families we have merely been repeating what had
already been established before ? This way of reasoning would indeed
be justified with regard to studies using no control groups or control
groups not matched for social class and economic conditions, but it is
not justified for studies with properly matched controls. If the control
cases come from such groups the large family may represent an addi-
tional criminogenic element, and it will have to be considered in
particular in connection with the overcrowding factor with which it is
closely associated. The same may apply to the intelligence factor,
although the evidence is not particularly strong. The Report on
Sterilisation of 1934, 27 for example, reproduced some figures showing
slightly larger numbers of children in families with one or more men-
tally defective children than in families of normal children, but con-
cluded that ‘the supposed abnormal fertility of defectives is, in our
view, largely mythical.’ Cyril Burt, whose material dated from the
years immediately after the Fi rst World W ar, found that ‘children from
the poorest social classes not only have an intelligence that is nearly
two years below that of the children from the better social classes, but
are drawn from families that are nearly twice as large’. 28 But he
thought that with improved living conditions this difference would

GROUPS AS FACTORS IN CRIME

grow smaller; how far this has actually materialized we do not know.
What could, however, be maintained with some justification is that
parents of low mental capacity are intellectually and emotionally less
able to provide all the care and affection, material resources and
discipline needed for more than a limited number of children. Even
normal families living near the poverty line will often be defeated by
an over-large offspring, and children’s allowances are usually far too
small to restore the balance.

Characteristic is this sentence in a probation officer’s report: ‘The
parents — decent enough in a way — seem bewildered at the fact that
there are seven children and spend their energies wondering what to
do instead of doing it’, or the following written by a Borstal medical
officer: ‘Parents are apparently too much occupied with reproduction
to give much — if any — attention to moulding and shaping the material
they had already produced. The boy had to gain his character in the
streets and not in the home.’

On the other hand, it will be comforting to harassed parents of
large families to know that according to Durkheim the suicide rate
declines as the size of the family increases ; therefore, ‘it is the worst of
investments to substitute wealth for a portion of one’s offspring’. 29

Szabo distinguishes between two types of large families: those
which are large because of parental improvidence and others large
because birth control is prohibited on religious grounds; only the
first category is likely to be criminogenic. 80 This is a distinction
which, if placed on a broader than the religious basis, might well be
used to deal with the whole subject of family size in a more compre-
hensive way, to understand that numbers as such mean very little here
unless they are symptoms of an attitude to life.

The fact that of a sample of, say, 100 offenders more are likely to
come from large families than of a matched control group of 100 non-
offenders should not be confused with the obvious fact that in a large
family the chances that some , of them may be delinquent are higher
than in a small family.

(b) Sibling Position and Only Children. Delinquent Sibs. si Here we
are concerned with the question of whether the position which the
individual child occupies in the order of sibs, i.e. whether he or she is
the oldest or youngest or the second or third born, etc., or the position
as an only child may have any significance for his chances of becom-
ing a delinquent. This has attracted some attention from statisticians,
social anthropologists, and psychiatrists. Emanuel Miller, who made
a survey of the English and American literature up to 1944, concluded
that the available information was ‘singularly poor and contradic-
tory , and of the many variables involved in juvenile delinquency none
seemed to be especially related to the birth order. Nevertheless, there

611

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

are a few writers, especially Charles Goring, Karl Pearson and the
anthropologist M. Fortes, who have claimed that their statistical in-
vestigations had shown a definite excess of first-born children in their
samples of adult criminals or juvenile delinquents, 32 and according to
Goring and Pearson this applied to second-born ones, too. Moreover,
a few forms of mental abnormality which could have some bearing on
delinquency were thought to be more frequent among children hold-
ing a certain rank in the order of birth: mongolism among late and
last-born and imbecility among first-born. Alfred Adler, applying his
concept of the inferiority complex (see above, Chapter 17), maintained
that second-born children always found themselves in a position in-
ferior to their first-born sibs and had to fight for recognition, becom-
ing hostile and aggressive in the process. 33

Plausible as this is, it would seem to apply not only to second, but
to later children as well. Actually too much depends on individual
personalities to establish hard-and-fast rules on such matters. The
Gluecks maintain, on the strength of their statistical findings, that
‘middle’ children are more likely to become delinquents if this sibling
position occurs in combination with certain traits, for example lack of
common sense. 34 Whether this is more than a chance correlation is
not yet clear, but generally speaking one has to agree with Murphy
and Newcomb that psychological factors are here probably more im-
portant than the ‘objective fact of ordinal position’. 35 In support of
the findings of Goring and Pearson it can also be argued that first-
born children are often saddled by their parents with responsibilities
far too heavy for their age, which may lead them to delinquent
acts.

In the Cambridge-Somerville material analysed by the McCords
(Note 11 above) the middle children had the highest percentage con-
victed of crime (p. 118), which they think is due to the fact that such
children arrive at a time when the family’s burden is most pressing.
This, however, may apply even more to the youngest child. Cyril Burt
(p. 95) found only children surprisingly often among his delinquents,
but he included in this category children who, while not actually only
ones, had been in the same psychological position for several years,
i.e. in cases where the age difference between them and their older or
younger sibs was unusually large. One of the most recent investiga-
tions was carried out by Lees and Newson on two samples of juvenile
probationers in the Midlands with, briefly, the following results:
relatively more youngest and only children come from disturbed
homes ; the eldest and only ones were more inclined towards indivi-
dual delinquencies, the intermediates more towards group delin-
quencies, as ‘drifters’; the eldest and youngest tended more to be
serious and recurrent offenders. The explanation given by the authors

612

GROUPS AS FACTORS IN CRIME

is that the eldest and only children, having nobody to imitate, learn
to face up alone to the adult world and therefore tend to be ‘lone
wolfs’ in their delinquent activities, too.

Occasionally the position of being the only girl in a family of several
boys has also been regarded as criminogenic, probably on the ground
that such girls may be infected with the delinquency bacillus by their
brothers. 36

Obviously, the characteristics and attitudes of other siblings, while
less crucial than those of the parents, can be very influential, and it is
here that the presence of other delinquents in the family plays its part.
Wootton has examined the material offered on this point by the
twenty-one studies selected by her (pp. 87-90). Her conclusion is that
‘not infrequently (according to some investigators very frequently)
other members of the delinquents’ . . . families have also been in
trouble with the law’ (p. 134). Shaw and McKay (see above. Chapter
23, Note 1) found that while of the boys who had no brothers with
official delinquency records 56-5 per cent continued as adults to com-
mit crime, 72 per cent of the boys with delinquent brothers did so
(pp. 176-7). And more clearly than in these figures is the criminogenic
influence of older brothers on the younger ones demonstrated in
Shaw’s story of Brothers in Crime? 1 On the other hand, according to
West, most of the preventive detainees in his sample were the only
offenders in their families. 38

(c) Parental Attitudes. We are now approaching what are the really
crucial points of this discussion. It is here that we can hope to get
some satisfactory answers to the age-old question: why is it that of
several children of the same parents the one becomes a criminal and
the other not? In the present context we are looking for the right
answer not in the physiological field, i.e. we take the fact here for
granted that even the same couple of parents may be not in exactly
the same physiological condition when producing their various chil-
dren and that important individual differences may result from this.
Nobody who looks at families with several children with a critical
eye will doubt this. Here we are trying to find the answer in terms of
socio-psychological differences in attitudes and responses. Surpris-
ingly, this factor was not included in Lady Wootton’s list although
several of the studies which she used provided information on it. The
following survey, too, does not pretend to cover the whole or even
most of the available material — repetitions and platitudes have been
all too prominent in the literature— but at least some of the more im-
portant recent studies will be referred to, a few of them published too
late to be available to Wootton: Burt, Healy and Bronner, Carr-
Saunders et al (Young Offenders), Stott, Andry, Glueck, McCord.
No pomt-by-point analysis of these studies and comparison of their

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

results will here be attempted; this would be largely futile because of
the great differences in case material, approach, and techniques—
differences only to be expected from studies scattered over a period of
close to forty years. What they all have in common is that they stress
the crucial significance of parental attitudes, affection and discipline.
Cyril Burt finds defective discipline, defined as too strict, too lenient,
or virtually non-existent, five times as often with his delinquents as
with his non-delinquents, a coefficient of association as high as
0-55. 39 Less striking, but still highly significant are the differences
given in Young Offenders (p. 67), where the percentages of London
parents whose attitudes to the child could be regarded as normal were
found to be 83*7 for the controls and 54*6 for the delinquents. Particu-
lar emphasis is placed on this subject of discipline by the Gluecks and
the McCords. In their previous study Unraveling Juvenile Delinquency
the former had found the usual striking contrast in matters of parental
discipline 40 in favour of the non-delinquents. In their more recent
Family Environment this has been taken a few steps further. It is one
of the primary objects of that study to see how a given social factor
influences boys possessing different traits. Consequently, matters of
discipline are now no longer treated in isolation, but correlated to
certain features in the boy’s personality to ascertain the effect of cer-
tain kinds of discipline on certain personality types. It is in fact no
longer a single tune, discipline, that is played in splendid isolation by
a solo violin; a whole orchestra is let loose with a long succession of
variations on that apparently so simple theme. Is faulty discipline,
these authors ask, ‘a direct influence on delinquency, or does it oper-
ate, in part at least, through the development in a child of certain
traits which are, in turn, more characteristic of delinquents than of
non-delinquents?’ (p. 133). As throughout the volume, the answers
are only tentative, but even so they have their value in helping to pro-
duce pictures of various personality types in which faulty parental
discipline plays its part in a highly selective manner. Making use of
the correlations presented in their Appendices they assert, for ex-
ample, that overstrictness on the part of the mother makes for the
development of hostility, whereas her permissiveness contributes to
the child’s feeling of isolation and resentment, and erratic discipline
is associated with such traits as impracticality and lack of conscien-
tiousness — all of them traits already found to be more frequent in
delinquents than non-delinquents. Similarly, correlations are believed
to exist between defective discipline on the part of the father and
other traits previously found to be characteristic of delinquents.
Some of these correlations may be said to be borne out by common
sense, others not; for example why should a permissive discipline
contribute to a child’s feeling of isolation and resentment? Perhaps

614

GROUPS AS FACTORS IN CRIME

because certain children require firm handling and may feel that they
do not receive their due without it?

Parental discipline is also treated very fully in the McCord follow-
up analysis of the Cambridge-SomerviUe case material. These authors
try to work out a typology consisting of six types of discipline: love-
oriented, punitive, lax as the three main categories, with three com-
binations of erratic discipline, i.e. love-oriented and lax (A), love-
oriented, lax and punitive (B), punitive and lax (C). It was found that
children whose discipline had been consistent, whether love-oriented
or punitive, or even a mixture of love-oriented and lax methods, had
a significantly lower rate of subsequent sentences to penal institu-
tions than the others (p. 77). There was, surprisingly perhaps, no evi-
dence that consistently punitive discipline was a criminogenic factor;
on the contrary. Consistency was more important than the choice be-
tween punitive and lovc-oriented methods. Notwithstanding such
occasional observations, however, it is generally agreed that wrong
methods of punishing used by parents, especially arbitrary or exces-
sive punishment, or punishment meted out without an explanation
which the child can understand, will make it bitter and resentful and
prepare the ground for delinquency as an act of revenge.

Further material on the subject of inconsistent discipline is given
by Kate Fricdlandcr, who states: ‘I have never found the same degree
of inconsistency in the handling of primitive instinctive drives in the
history of neurotic patients as I invariably find in the histories of
delinquents. 141

This whole matter of parental discipline has, of course, to be seen
against the background of country, social class, and the period of
time we have in mind. Scores of psychologists and sociologists have
stressed the fundamental differences existing between the different
social classes in techniques of child rearing and disciplining, with
higher-class parents preferring the technique of withdrawal of love,
lower-class parents that of physical threats and penalties. 42 There are,
however, similar differences between countries and periods, although
in the course of the present century a general trend can be observed
towards more lenient, indirect and subtle techniques. Was it not the
twentieth century that started in the grand manner as the Jahrhimdert
des Kindcs, the century of the child? Much has been accomplished
under this slogan, but its beneficial results have been at least equalled
by the mistakes and exaggerations which it has produced. Not least
among them is the senseless spoiling of children, which parents usually
excuse by explaining that since they had been so badly treated by
their own parents they want their offspring to have a happier child-
hood; moreover, as they will anyhow’, sooner or later, be the victims
of a nuclear war or another world catastrophe why not have a good

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

time at least as long as the going is good? This attitude of mind has
produced the faulty and inconsistent or completely lacking parental
discipline which is by fairly common consent one of the root causes
of juvenile and adolescent delinquency. ‘Many children . . . have done
from childhood what they wanted to do when they wanted to do it. At
times they have been reprimanded or punished for acts which are
passed over unnoticed on the next occasion . . . One parent may per-
mit what another forbids . . .’ 43 Coupled with this are our correspond-
ing inconsistencies, our ‘sloppiness ’, 44 in our official dealings with
delinquent children and adolescents — this, however, would require
another book. According to Sellin, ‘in one of the oldest known docu-
ments of ancient Egypt an unknown writer complains that the world
is “going to the dogs” for children disobey their parents ’. 45 What has
changed since that complaint was made is that we possess a somewhat
clearer understanding now of the factors behind such disobedience.

Consistency of treatment is required not only from both parents
towards one individual child, but just as much in their dealings with
their whole family. Discrimination against one, preferential treat-
ment of another are, rightly or wrongly, among the most frequent
complaints made by juvenile delinquents as well as adult criminals
when trying to justify their conduct. Some of these complaints may
be irrational, others only too well founded. Healy and Bronner call
it ‘most enlightening’ to observe the great differences shown by the
parents of their samples in feelings and behaviour towards different
children , 40 and Eissler reports similar acts of injustice . 47 It would in-
deed be surprising if this feeling of injustice, to which attention has
already been drawn in other connections, should fail to be a crimino-
genic factor in parent-child relations.

There may be cultures where consistency of treatment is not re-
garded as equally essential as it is in western society. In a thought-
provoking, though perhaps not throughout convincing, comparison
of adolescent values and behaviour among the Chinese population of
Hawaii and those of white ‘Chicagoans’ the Chicago anthropologist
Francis L. K. Hsu points out that the Chinese child has, as a matter
of course and apparently without harmful effects, to experience a
good deal of inconsistency in his social relationships . 48 This will be so
partly because ‘Chinese, especially the mothers, are not too concerned,
about consistency in discipline’, and partly because there are always
many other relatives present who will interfere with the efforts of the
parents. Nor, by the way, do Chinese parents worry too much about
frustration or security for their children; questions of ‘social and
ritual propriety’ are much more important. The most striking differ-
ence between these Chinese-American adolescents in Hawaii and
white American adolescents is, according to Hsu, the absence of

616

GROUPS AS FACTORS IN CRIME

rebellion against parental authority. ‘The “big fight” with parents is
lacking’ (p. 43), because with the Chinese their initiation into the
wider society has begun much earlier in life and because the parents,
notwithstanding their very close relationship to their children, do not
wish to retain their power over them for too long. This absence of
frustration and rebellion makes for less adolescent crime.

In western society the overprotective and possessive type of mother
has been held responsible for certain forms of delinquency. According
to the description given by an English psychiatrist, P. D. Scott, the
‘spiv’ of the early post-war years, whether delinquent or not:

has typically been a timid, well-behaved uncomfortably mother-attached
child who then at puberty or soon after begins to become restless, uneasy
at home and rebellious and resentful of parental control . . . Typically the
father has either been absent (and this I believe is one of the ways in which
the influence of wars declares itself . . .) or is frightening, or has been
forced into or kept in an inferior, deflated position by his wife . . . The
mother, on the other hand ... is possessive and keeps the child anxiously
dependent upon her. . . . 49

The unwanted child also has its secure place in criminological
literature as being a serious risk, be it the accidental offspring of
parents who did not want to have any more children or children at all
or of parents who wanted a boy instead of a girl or vice versa. This
may lead either to complete deprivation of parental love or to the
wrong kind of affection and upbringing, if, for example, the mother
who had been hoping for a girl treats the boy as if he were a girl and
tries to suppress his masculine instincts, thereby unwittingly en-
couraging homosexual tendencies. 50

It would be futile to attempt to draw up a list of inimical situations
and parental mistakes which, even in structurally normal families,
may produce the risk of delinquency ; no such list could ever be com-
plete. To the investigator, whether practical social worker or research
criminologist, the difficulty of getting at the roots of such family
troubles is immense as even in a seriously disturbed family atmo-
sphere most members will usually, at least at the beginning, try to
present a common front against the intruder and hide their real prob-
lems from him. On the other hand, surprisingly often interviewers
of delinquents and their parents, in Britain as well as in the United
States, rightly or wrongly believe they have been given a true picture
of the family situation. 51 This naturally applies in particular to those
who had been in closer touch with the delinquent and his family over
a period of time. This difficulty of how to unearth the truth about the
family relationships of delinquents has been systematically tackled in
R. G. Andry’s research incorporated in his Delinquency and Parental

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

Pathology. In his interviews he put the same questions, ‘suitably re-
phrased’, to the boys, delinquents and non-delinquents, and their
parents and placed the main emphasis not on the actual facts but on
the subjective perceptions of his interviewees of the affective roles
played by parents and boys respectively (p. 9). By asking the boys, for
example, ‘Which parent do you think loves you most — or you feel is a
little closer to you?’ he found that 69 per cent of the delinquents felt
more loved by their mothers than by their fathers, against 14 per cent
of the non-delinquents, or that 62 per cent of the delinquents felt that
‘the right amount of love was given by both parents’, against 93 per
cent of the non-delinquents (p. 30). Similarly, there was a far greater
tendency among the delinquents than among the non-delinquents to
feel parental hostility towards themselves (pp. 34-5). The correspond-
ing interviews with the parents showed complete agreement with the
assessments given by the boys in 73 per cent of the delinquents and
87 per cent of the non-delinquents (p. 38), which, together with the
answers elicited on several similar questions, seemed to indicate that
a true picture of the family atmosphere had been produced by these
interviews.

The decisive influence of the home atmosphere is perhaps nowhere
brought out more strongly than in D. H. Stott’s already repeatedly
quoted study of 102 Approved School boys. It has often been pointed
out that such a sample is bound to contain an exceptionally high pro-
portion of children from unhappy homes since this is one of the
criteria which determine the juvenile courts to make an Approved
School instead of a Probation Order, a factor of which Stott was of
course fully aware. In the circumstances, it is hardly surprising that
all the five principal sources of ‘delinquent breakdown’ in Stott’s
typology, i.e. avoidance excitement, spite and resentment against the
parents, the need to test the parents’ loyalty, withdrawal reaction,
and inferiority compensation, had their roots in a feeling of insecurity,
anxiety, fear created by a, to them, intolerable family situation.

2. Broken Homes

No other term in the history of criminological thought has been so
much overworked (Glover), misused, and discredited as this. For
many years universally proclaimed as the most obvious explanation
of both juvenile delinquency and adult crime, it is now often regarded
as the ‘black sheep’ in the otherwise respectable family of crimino-
logical theories, and most writers shamefacedly turn their backs to it.
The reasons for this volte-face are only too clear. Already in 1949 the
present writer complained about ‘the use of unscientific conceptions,
unscientific because much too broad and inadequately subdivided.

618

GROUPS AS FACTORS IN CRIME

Essentially different situations are lumped together without discrimi-
nation. One “broken” home is often treated in our statistics exactly
like another, regardless of the fact that the break may have been due
to death in the one and to desertion in the other case; regardless of
the age of the child at the time when the break occurred.’ 52 Barbara
Wootton, who included the ‘broken home’ in her list of twelve fac-
tors, made a careful survey of the methods used and the results ob-
tained in the twenty-one investigations on which her analysis was
based and concluded that the material was ‘quite exceptionally diffi-
cult to sort out’. 53 In our present survey the term will be used to refer
to external breaks only, to the exclusion of homes which, though
structurally intact, suffer from a bad psychological atmosphere and
whose problems have been discussed under 1. However, even within
such limits it is essential for a meaningful analysis of the significance
of such external breaks that investigators should carefully distinguish,
and make their system of classification clear, between the various
types of break, such as death, desertion, separation, divorce, pro-
longed absence of one parent, etc., with the possible addition of step-
parents and step-sibs. 54 Illegitimate children, who have not been sub-
sequently legitimated in accordance with the Legitimacy Acts, 1926
and 1959, and whose home has never been structurally complete, have
also to be included. Clearly, the social and psychological problems
may be very different for each of these categories of ‘broken homes’.
A home broken by death of one parent may be far more harmonious
than one that is broken by divorce or separation or one that is com-
plete but tom by violent quarrels.

There would be little point in reproducing the comprehensive stati-
stical material collected by large numbers of investigators in many
countries on the incidence of the various kinds of broken homes
among delinquents. As Wootton, whose analysis covers only a very
small section of this material, has shown, they are hardly comparable,
and many of them suffer from vagueness of definitions and weak-
nesses of execution. They all agree that a high proportion of delin-
quents, on an average perhaps one-third, come from broken homes.
Very few of the writers, however, present any control group material
to show the difference in this respect between delinquents and non-
delinquents. Exceptions are, the Gluecks (whose figures show no
striking contrasts), 55 Carr-Saunders et al. where the contrasts are
slightly more pronounced (e.g. in 33 per cent of the delinquents
against 20 per cent of the non-delinquents the parents were living
apart), 50 and the Borstal Prediction Study. In the latter a comparison
was made not between the Borstal boys and a matched sample of non-
delinquents, but between the former and the general population, with
the result that in the Borstal sample the ‘normal’ home, i.e. mother,

619

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

father and siblings, accounted for 45 per cent, in the general popula-
tion for 62 per cent. 57 It is interesting to remember in this connection
that for a period approximately sixty years earlier the Rev. W. D.
Morrison had quoted the figure of 51 per cent of the Industrial
Schools population as coming from a broken home. 58 For Germany
Exner mentions an estimate of 62 per cent of wayward youngsters in
a sample of 2,000 as coming from incomplete homes (in 1934) against
3 1 per cent in the general population, a difference significantly greater
than the English. 59 For post-war France, Szabo found one of the
highest coefficients of correlation, i.e. 0-63, between criminality and
divorce. 60

Step-parents are in a difficult position generally and they have their
niche in the criminological literature, too; not because they are all
bad — many of them are kind and try conscientiously to replace the
missing parent. But they have to fight against a natural prejudice and
the traditional reputation of the wicked step-mother, and the bringing
together of two or even three categories of children into one home
often makes it impossible for them to distribute love and justice im-
partially. 61 Sexual offences committed by step-fathers against their
step-daughters are not rare; there is here hardly the same psycho-
logical incest barrier which, though often enough ineffectively, exists
towards own children; moreover, the age difference may be smaller
than in the real father-daughter relationship. Clifford Shaw’s ‘Jack
Roller’ described himself as the victim of a bad step-mother. What
C. G. Jung writes about foster-parents also applies to step-parents:
‘Many children can adapt themselves to foster-parents, but not all;
and those who cannot develop a most self-centred and ruthlessly ego-
tistical attitude, with the unconscious purpose of getting some sort of
satisfaction through themselves in place of that which real parents
might have given them.’ 62

An extreme case, where a young man of 22 was charged with the murder
of his step-mother by strangulation, came before the Central Criminal
Court in London in 1937. In his statement to the police the accused main-
tained that ‘trouble began as soon as the step-brother was born’; his own
brother and sister left home because they could not get on with bis step-
mother, and the father agreed with counsel for the defence that ‘on the
whole the accused had had a rather unhappy life and did not get on very
well with his step-mother’ (The Times, 30.4.1937). The step-mother’s story
was not available.

For the past twenty years, ever since the first publication of John
Bowlby’s remarkable study Forty-four Juvenile Thieves, the issue of
maternal deprivation in the sense of prolonged physical separation of
a child from his mother during the first five years of life has been in

620

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

can be ignored in the present context, ( b ) psychological as a con-
comitant of physical separation, (c) physical without concomitant
psychological separation (p. 100). He then goes on to study the in-
cidence of physical separation with special reference to some of the
criteria used by Bowlby, for example age of the child when separation
occurred, its length and frequency, with the result that the findings
neither validated nor invalidated the Bowlby theory (p. 113). 65
Another attempt to validate or disprove the theory was made by the
Norwegian psychologist Siri Naess in two consecutive pieces of re-
search, 68 also with inconclusive results, although the latter were more
favourable to Bowlby in the second than in the first investigation.
Naess sums up that mother-child separation as such is only a ‘minor
criminogenetic factor which has to be conceived as part of the picture
of an unstable family life’. Similarly, Mary D. Ainsworth, in a very
detailed review of the whole literature on the effects of maternal
deprivation, not restricted to its delinquency aspects, 67 can say noth-
ing more but that the matter ‘remains problematic’ and that it should
be seen in relation to some ‘special form of distortion in early parent-
child relations’. In short, it has been demoted from one of the all-
important to one among many contributory factors.

One of the most recent studies has been made by Field 68 who,
applying a rather unusual criterion, obtained results incompatible
with Bowlby’s theory.

There is one specific aspect of family life that has increasingly been
blamed for juvenile delinquency in recent years, absence of the
mother from home to work in factories, offices, or shops. Below in
Chapter 26, p. 705, figures are given to show the great war-time and
post-war increase in female employment, and there has been abundant
speculation on its responsibility for delinquency. The Gluecks have
tried to replace mere speculation by statistical evidence, especially by
correlating the factor ‘housewife regularly or occasionally employed’
to a number of factors concerning the boys on whom information
had been previously collected in Unraveling Juvenile Delinquency . 6B
Factors such as ‘deep-seated hostility’ or ‘emotional conflict’ were in
this way correlated to the ‘working mother’ factor. The conclusion is
that especially the factor of the mother’s irregular, sporadic work
outside the home had a deleterious influence on family life and was
contributing to delinquency. This finding was, however, regarded as
merely tentative, and at the same time the Glueck research makes it
clear that this factor is only one among many. One has only to ask
whether mothers may not occasionally go out to work because of
their own psychological instability and irritability or of a similar lack
of emotional balance on the part of their husbands. In such cases,
their temporary absence may rather be an advantage to the home.

GROUPS AS FACTORS IN CRIME

Moreover, as Mays lias recently stressed, 70 since the economy of
many countries could not he maintained at its present level of afflu-
ence it is futile to complain about the criminogenic effects of female
labour.

In particular: Illegitimacy and Delinquency

Bertrand Russell once maintained that illegitimate birth was an ad-
vantage in stirring the child to quite exceptional efforts to compensate
for the blot. 71 This may happen in a minority of cases, but for the
majority the outcome is more likely to be the opposite. Cyril Burt’s
story of ‘Jerry’, with which he opens his book, 72 is far more represen-
tative, or at least it was so forty years ago. In the meantime, with our
changing views on many sexual matters and with new legislation 73 —
the Legitimacy Acts of 1926 and 1959, which introduced the possi-
bility of legitimation of children through subsequent marriage of the
parents 71 — the stigma and other social, economic, and psychological
handicaps of illegitimate birth have been lessened, but certainly not
eliminated. A former Metropolitan Magistrate of great experience,
Claud Mullins, writing in 1945, more than twenty years after Burt
and, therefore, giving a more up-to-date assessment of the situation,
concluded in his realistic and well-informed survey of the matter as
he had seen it in court that ‘all is far from being well with illegitimate
children, and unfortunately public opinion is not alive to the fact’. 76
Besides many other important points, he regards illegitimate preg-
nancy or birth as a frequent cause of offences on the part of the
mother: concealment of birth, abandonment or even murder or in-
fanticide, abortion, and prostitution offences (pp. 121-2).

The statistical assessment of the frequency of crime among illegiti-
mate as compared with other children is difficult. The matter can, as
so often, be tackled from either of both ends: First, we can examine
the incidence of crime in a group of illegitimate and a matched con-
trol group of legitimate children. Or, secondly, we can study the in-
cidence of illegitimacy in a group of delinquents against its incidence
in a matched control group of non-delinquents or in the general popu-
lation. The second method has been more frequently used than the
first. It is fairly reliable if the control group is well matched; where
this is not the case and, in particular, where the comparison is made
with the incidence of illegitimacy in the general population, the results
will be unreliable since the incidence of illegitimacy in the general
population is not known. We know only the frequency of illegitimate
births, but on account of the higher mortality rate of the latter 76 we
cannot say how many illegitimate children of a certain age are still
alive in the general population at any given time.

623

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

The statistical material available shows throughout a preponder-
ance of illegitimates in the delinquent as against the control groups, 77
or against the general population. 78 More impressive still are the case
histories, of which that of ‘Jerry’ is probably the best known. 79 The
absence of a father figure, with which the boy could identify himself,
the resulting sense of insecurity and inferiority, coupled with hostility
towards the mother, are very prominent features in many of these
cases, which often defy the devoted efforts of probation officers.

3. Social Problem Families 80

Much has been written in recent years about a special category of
families which, for want of a better name, are called ‘Problem Fami-
lies’. The definition of this term is difficult. Most writers are content
to include all families showing features generally regarded as un-
desirable from the point of view of an ordered society and belonging
to its lowest strata: low intelligence, immaturity, self-centredness,
poor health, very low and irregular incomes, bad and overcrowded
housing; inability to look after their children, of whom there are usu-
ally far too many, and to spend their money wisely; drink, and so on.
It is also agreed that very few such families possess all these charac-
teristics, but most possess a fair collection of them. Occasionally
another feature, almost inevitably arising from the usual ones, is
added: making constant demands on the social agencies without
profiting from the help given by them. 81 Similar is Wootton’s defini-
tion as a family ‘whose consumption of social workers’ time greatly
exceeds the average of the local community’. The question which is of
a special interest to us is whether it has been proved that these families
are a serious source of crime and juvenile delinquency. Wootton
thinks this is not the case, but her own references cast at least some
doubts on this conclusion (p. 58). The Cardiff study by Harriett
Wilson, for example, which is one of the comparatively few crimino-
logical investigations of the matter, shows that the 52 problem fami-
lies examined had a delinquency rate eight times as high as the general
rate for Cardiff and well over twice as high as the rate for non-
problem families living in the closest vicinity to them. Moreover, the
problem families living in low-delinquency areas of Cardiff showed a
delinquency rate similar to that of those residing in high-delinquency
areas. From this, Wilson concludes that ‘juvenile delinquency is
home-centred and not area-centred’, which, considering the small
number of her cases, may seem to be somewhat too sweeping. Why
not admit that juvenile delinquency is often home- and area-centred,
although the bad influence of the area may be more easily offset by a
good home than vice versa? What might possibly be conceded to

624

GROUPS AS FACTORS IN CRIME

Wootton is that the worst types of problem families do not very often
produce the most serious types of criminals.

After this section had been written a Review and Annotated Biblio-
graphy on the ‘Multi-Problem Family’ was published in Canada.
Apart from a detailed Bibliography its most important contribution
to the subject is an article by John C. Spencer who, in an international
historical survey, stresses that the ‘multi-problem family’ becomes
more noticeable as the general standard of the community concerned
rises. He summarizes the various typologies employed in the definition
and the most important experiments in treatment and prevention. 82

A particularly perceptive analysis of the family problems of two
groups of young inmates of two Belgian correctional institutions, one
prison and one reformatory, has been given by Christian Debuyst in
his Criminels et valeurs vecues, soon to be available in an English
translation. 83

Looking back at the total picture of the family as a criminogenic
factor our impression (see above, Chapter 22, 2(c)) seems to have been
confirmed that the strength of those ‘intergenerational’ tensions,
while still a serious source of adolescent delinquency, is gradually
weakening because of the slow retreat on the part of the parents. On
the other hand, class conflicts in the broadest sense of the word are,
in spite of the changing pattern of our class structure, if anything be-
coming more tense. However, for the time being this has to remain
mere conjecture.

4. The Criminological Significance of Marriage 81

The criminological role of the family has to be considered not merely,
as so far done in this chapter, in relation to the children, but also with
regard to the adult persons concerned. Two inter-related questions
arise: first, is marital status as such a crime-preventing or a crime-pro-
moting factor in adult life, and, secondly, is there a difference in this
respect between men and women ?

Statistical material on the subject is provided in the volumes of
official criminal statistics of many countries, not however in those of
Britain. It is not easy to obtain reliable information of this kind with-
out probing deeply into the family affairs of offenders, many of whom
are inclined to give a wrong picture of their marital status, to pretend
to be married when they are only co-habiting, to suppress informa-
tion on. desertion or separation, or illegitimacy, and so on. Charac-
teristic in this respect is the experience of T. and P. Morris in their
census of the Pentonville population (p. 68). Without thorough social
case studies such official statistics may be valueless. Moreover, even
as far as their facts may be reliable, statistical investigations into

ccn-v 625

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

marital status are misleading unless careful distinctions are made ac-
cording to age groups and the various possible types of marital re-
lationships. Single persons have to be distinguished not only from
married but also from divorced or widowed ones, separately for each
sex. In the past, many investigators have failed to do so, with un-
fortunate results. If, for example, no distinctions are made according
to age, the obvious fact that the most criminal age groups among
adult males, i.e. those of 17-21, include a larger proportion of single
individuals than older male age groups is ignored and the conclusion
is easily drawn that single males are throughout more criminal than
married ones, whereas the figures may merely prove that there are
age differences in criminal propensities which may have but little to
do with marriage. The beginnings of more careful classifications in
researches on the subject are usually dated back to the work of the
German medical statistician F. Prinzing, whose various papers on
this and allied matters were published around 1900. 85 His and several
subsequent investigations present roughly the following picture: for
men up to the age of 25 the criminality rates are higher for married
than for single ones, whereas the opposite is true for those over 25.
This can easily be explained by the probability that for young men
marriage often means financial and moral responsibilities with which
they cannot well cope, especially as very early marriages are more
frequent among the poorer classes. 86 To gain a reliable picture one
would have to compare samples of married and unmarried men
matched not only for age but also for social and economic class. The
other fairly universally accepted fact is that, generally speaking, un-
married women have lower crime rates than married ones in all age
groups alike, but for the most serious crimes against the person this
is different. 87 If criminality is weighed, not merely counted, married
women are therefore in a more favourable position than single ones.
Widowed and especially divorced and separated persons have, for
obvious reasons, throughout higher crime rates than the others, with
differences according to age groups. 88

Turning now from such large over-all statistical data to a few small
groups, we find that unfavourable marital relationships are particu-
larly frequent among criminals, especially persistent offenders, al-
though comparisons with non-criminal groups are usually missing.
There are occasional comments on the fortunate, crime-preventing,
effect of happy marriages. D. J. West, who recently examined the cir-
cumstances of ‘habitual prisoners’ who were ‘intermittent’ recidivists,
i.e. had gaps of ‘at least four years at liberty and free from convic-
tions’, as distinguished from those recidivists who had no such gaps,
found markedly better marital records among the first of these groups,
and he comments: ‘marriage or cohabitation played an important

626

GROUPS AS FACTORS IN CRIME

part in many genuine gaps, especially in the cases of those prisoners
who allowed their women to assume a motherly, protective role — ’ 89

Norval Morris, in his analysis of thirty-two preventive detainees
and two hundred and seventy other ‘confirmed recidivists’, described
the marital position of the first sample with the words ‘It would be
hard to find a more lamentable pattern of misdirected sexual energy
and marital discord’ and that of the second sample as, while not as
bad as that of the first, ‘an abnormally confused’ pattern; the aetio-
logical significance of these disturbed marital relationships, he adds,
‘can only be surmised’, but many cases were found where, he thinks,
the death of a wife or other breaks in the cohesion of the marriage
were a precipitating cause of relapse into crime. 80

The Gluccks, in their follow-up study of Later Criminal Careers,
had cases in their sample where a happy marriage had facilitated the
‘natural process of maturation’, but there was also evidence that in
some cases, despite a happy marriage, the offender had failed to settle
down. 81 Norval Morris draws attention to a number of cases where
the prisoners were happily married to women who were active crimi-
nals, too, which he regards as evidence of complete ‘professionality’;
such women arc usually perfect prisoner’s wives and stick to them
through long sentences. 92 A German investigation of the Nazi period
found that in a sample of recidivists 45 per cent of their wives had also
been convicted, whereas the figure for occasional offenders was only
1-3 per cent. The author regards this as evidence of a ‘biological law’
of choosing the marriage partner, but another German criminologist,
Exner, while admitting the likelihood of a natural selection on such
lines, quotes the example of identical twins whose conduct had in
some cases been entirely different, depending on the different charac-
ter of their wives. 83 The choice of the marriage partner can indeed
turn out to be just as well a crime-preventing as a crime-promoting
factor, and the outcome will depend on chance or personality in the
broadest sense rather than on strictly biological affinity. It can here
often be observed that the extremes possess a peculiarly attracting
force in this respect. Howard Jones has a psychologically interesting
chapter on the wives of alcoholics and the contributory part which
they may play by, at least subconsciously, encouraging the drinking
habits of their husbands. 91 While his observations may not through-
out be applicable to the wives of criminals, at least for some such cases
they may provide valuable clues.

II. THE SCHOOL AND EDUCATION 95

In Chapter 20 this subject was dealt with in relation to social mobi-
lity; now it has to be seen in a wider setting as a potential factor in

627

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

juvenile delinquency and adult crime. There are two main aspects of
it, both of which have been discussed in the literature for many years:
First, the relatively short-term aspect of the delinquent child at school
and the role of the latter as a delinquency preventing or provoking
agency, with special emphasis on the issue of truancy. Secondly, there
is the much wider aspect of education as a continuing and, ideally at
least, life-long process and the part which it plays in the anti-social
behaviour of adults. It is strictly speaking only the first aspect
which can be accommodated under the heading of ‘primary group’
problems with which the present chapter is concerned— and even
here it may be doubtful whether the school is in fact a primary
group — but it would in any case be cumbersome to allocate the
second aspect, which is so closely related to the first, to a different
chapter.

1. The Short-term Aspect

Next to the family, the school is the most important social group
which the child enters, but unlike the family it is one which invariably
makes immediate demands on him. Here the child learns that there is
a world in which he can no longer take a privileged position for
granted and expect maternal indulgence in case of misbehaviour.
Here he may encounter a code of values different and occasionally
even diametrically opposed to that of his parents. He observes his
mother defending his misdeeds and lying to the teacher about his
truancy, instigating or at least condoning his pilfering from outsiders, ,
which is so strongly frowned upon by his teachers. He has to mix with
children from other homes, some better and some worse than his own,
with a variety of customs and class characteristics, and he may find
that in the homes of certain of his new friends he is not welcome. The
teacher, too, may prefer other pupils for reasons not yet clear to the
child. In short, he receives the first glimpse of a world infinitely more
complex and cruel than the one to which he had so far been ac-
customed. While this applies to the child from a reasonably good
home, his fellows from very bad ones, though perhaps vaguely ap-
preciating the better standards met at the school, will often be unable
to benefit from them as the contrast with home conditions goes too
deep to be overcome unaided. In any case, his ability to adjust him-
self to the complexity arising from the difference in standards and to
get along with other people with different backgrounds will be
severely tested. It is this capacity for social adjustment more than his
scholastic ability that may be decisive for his behaviour and his atti-
tude towards delinquency. When discussing the impact of the school
on delinquency many points besides the mere effect of acquiring, or

628

GROUPS AS FACTORS IN CRIME

failing to acquire, knowledge as taught in school should therefore be
considered. Only a few of them can here be taken up.

Already in the Report of the Committee for Investigating the Causes
of the Alarming Increase of Juvenile Delinquency in the Metropolis,
published in 1816, the ‘want of education’ is mentioned as one of the
principal causes, 96 and ever since the same view has been taken by a
number of official and private publications in various countries, until
Lombroso raised some doubts with his view that better education
merely meant better equipment for criminal exploits, a view to be
dealt with more fully below in Section 2.

The ‘uncongenial’ school was listed by Cyril Burt in 7 per cent of
his delinquent cases against 0-5 of the controls; 07 and he asked why
the school was not blamed for a child’s delinquency more often than
his home. His answer was, first, that the school’s material equipment
was far superior to that of the average worker’s home and, secondly,
that there was a popular, in Burt’s view mistaken, assumption that
the home, not the school, was principally responsible for the child’s
morality. It should be the duty of the state, he suggested, to supple-
ment through the schools the disciplinary shortcomings of the home
(pp. 185-6). In the forty years since Burt expressed this view much
has been written for and against, and it would be inappropriate for
the present writer who has no intimate knowledge of the modern
school system to take sides in the many controversies existing in this
field and to pass judgment on the work of the schools in providing
social education for citizenship unless he could call to his aid writers
better equipped than himself. In one of the best-informed recent
books, however, which, though limited to a survey of some working-
class districts of Liverpool, provides a well-balanced and sympathetic
picture of the whole subject, John B. Mays states that ‘the Crown
Street schools are failing to fulfil their functions in certain respects
and that they are producing many young people who are technically
and intellectually ill-equipped to find a satisfactory niche for them-
selves in the economic and commercial life of the city’. 98 And Pro-
fessor T. S. Simey, in his Preface to Mays’s book, sums up to the effect
that ‘to some extent, the Crown Street schools are alien institutions
in a world which they seek to change. Their task is to redeem the
society in which they are placed rather than to perpetuate it’, a theme
which Mays takes up again in the words: ‘in the down-town neigh-
bourhoods, education is increasingly an introduction of an alien cul-
ture, and in so far as this is true, a source of potential conflict’ (p. 8).
He finds hardly any relationship between the cultural contents of the
teaching in these schools and the sordid environment in which the
children actually have to spend their lives (p. 90).

With regard to delinquency, he stresses the class bias in dealing

629

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

with delinquent school children (p. 17, fn. 4), but also shows in detail
how much the general atmosphere and the behaviour of the children
attending schools in this slum district have improved in recent years
through the combined efforts of the schools, the police liaison officers
and social workers, 09

Turning now to a few studies comparing the attainment and con-
duct of delinquent with those of non-delinquent school children,
reference may be made to one English and one American investiga-
tion. In this country, in Young Offenders school conduct and attain-
ment were examined with the result that for both factors, particularly
the first, the position was less favourable for the delinquents than for
the controls (pp. 85-6). It should be borne in mind, however, that
these assessments were made by the teachers, whose views may, un-
consciously, have been occasionally influenced by the fact of delin-
quency which often means annoyance to the teacher and to the school
as a whole. 100 On the other hand, one remembers the important part
played in the American Cambridge-Somerville Study by the teachers
in selecting the ‘pre-delinquent’ boys and their initial reluctance to
‘point a finger at a child and say “This boy will be a criminal’”. 101

More detailed comparisons were made by the Gluecksin Unraveling
Juvenile Delinquency, 102 showing a similar inferiority on all points of
the delinquents in spite of the fact that the two samples were matched
for intelligence. Moreover, in addition to various other differences,
there was a striking contrast in the percentages of those who had
truanted at one time or another in the course of their schooling (94-8
per cent of the delinquents, 10-8 per cent of the non-delinquents) and
of those who expressed a violent dislike of the school (6T5 per cent of
the delinquents, 10-3 per cent of the non-delinquents). It might be
argued that some of these findings were coloured by the fact that the
delinquent boys were taken from a correctional school and that,
although much of the comparative material referred to the school
careers of the boys before entering that institution, nevertheless at
least some of the information, notably the material collected by the
research psychiatrist in his interviews with the boys, reflects their
views as inmates of a correctional school. It is after all only natural
that some of the boys in such a school, even if it is a model of its kind,
may become prejudiced in their whole attitude towards schooling and
education. However, attitude surveys such as that conducted by
Reckless in English institutions show how complex the whole matter
is. 103

For young adults, much material on the educational position and
problems of British army offenders sent to one of the Special Training
Units is presented in Joseph Trenaman’s Out of Step. 10 * He asks how
it was possible for so many of these young soldiers to pass through

630

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

more favourable conditions it can be done. In the Cambridge-
Somerville Study predictions of future delinquency of boys of school
age were made by specially selected experts as well as by teachers with
the result that both predictors ‘succeeded above chance in predicting
delinquency’, but tended to over-predict it, partly because of un-
foreseeable events (p. 290). There was hardly any difference in the
accuracy of the predictions between the two groups. The Gluecks, in
their Unraveling Juvenile Delinquency (Chapter 20), produced a Pre-
diction Table for children at the point of school entrance, based on
social background and character structure, but there was naturally no
place in it for predictive material derived from the school, which these
children had not yet entered ; the authors suggest, however, that in
cases where maladjustment shows itself subsequently in school the
information gained through the Prediction Table might be used by
the education authorities to consider whether the child in question
might be a potential delinquent (p. 269). This would, of course, require
much better understanding on the part of the average teacher of the
potential causes of delinquency than his present training enables him
to acquire, but it may be worth while to arrange for some small-scale
experiments in selected areas in Britain. As conditions are now the
part played by the educational system in the prevention and predic-
tion of delinquency does not do full justice to the possibilities within
potential reach of the schools as the agencies through which the whole
child population has to pass during some of the most crucial periods
of life. In the words of Reckless, the school is ‘strategically situated
to deal with problem behaviour of youth’, 107 but if we should have to
accept the highly damning verdict of Clinard the general position in
the United States is, in spite of this ‘strategic position’, very unsatis-
factory in this field. 108 Some of the experimental work done in the
sphere of prevention by a few selected American schools was im-
pressively presented nearly thirty years ago in a symposium on Pre-
venting Crime; 109 it might well be brought up-to-date now to examine
the progress made in the meantime. Moreover, a similar symposium
on corresponding pioneer work in Britain and other countries would
be useful. In the otherwise very informative report written by Midden-,
dorff for the Second United Nations Congress of I960 110 the emphasis
is on special institutions for delinquent or maladjusted children, and
the same naturally applies to the admirable books published in
Britain by A. S. Neill, M. Burn, David Wills and Howard Jones. 111 In
the present connection, however, we are rather concerned with the
preventive work done, or often not done, in ordinary schools.
Truancy, labelled by William Healy as the ‘Kindergarten’ of
juvenile delinquency, is frequently regarded as the yardstick of the
failure on the part of the schools to prevent delinquency or to deal

632

GROUPS AS FACTORS IN CRIME

effectively with the actual delinquent. It is not necessarily a very
accurate yardstick. First, we have to distinguish between truancy m
the narrower sense of staying away from school without parental
knowledge or approval and an absence which, though unjustified,
occurs with such approval and is covered up by the parents. 112 In the
available statistics these two forms of truancy, although basically
different in their psychological background, are sometimes confused.
Equally confusing are some of the views on the causal relationship be-
tween truancy and delinquency, which may in fact involve three
different possibilities*. ( a ) truancy may lead to delinquency since the
truanting child, with idle time on his hands, little or no money and
afraid of showing himself at home, has to roam the streets in search
of food and entertainment and is likely to get into mischief; (b) in the
opposite direction, the child who has committed an offence may be
afraid of going to school where his misbehaviour may already be
known ; (c) what is probably most imp ortant, truancy and delinquency
may both be symptoms of some deeper maladjustment which mani-
fests itself in producing behaviour problems at home and in school.

There is a neurotic type of truant with a veritable ‘school phobia’
who is, however, not likely to become a delinquent, 113 but Stott
noted persistent truancy ‘as the counterpart in the schoolboy of those
symptoms of avoidance in older boys which consist in their inability
to tolerate steady activity . . . and their hankering after a change of
scene’ (p. 48). Tins seems to be a very apposite parallel and explains
many cases of truancy in the younger and delinquency in the older
boys. Already before Stott, another writer, Kvaraceus, had described
truancy as an ‘escape from conflict and failure’ ; in fact, 34 per cent of
his sample had become truant to make an end to an unbearable situa-
tion (Note 95 above, p. 144). The administrative procedure available
in cases of truancy has been described by Mays for Liverpool (pp. 77-
81) and more fully by Croft in a very valuable, but unfortunately un-
published, historical study of the area of the London County Council
(L.C.C.), enriched by a small number of characteristic case studies. 114

2. The Long-term Aspect

The second aspect, education as a process continuing into adulthood
and influencing, positively or negatively, the whole life of an in-
dividual, can here be treated only very briefly under the well-worn
formula: Is education likely to prevent or to provoke crime? It was
not difficult for Lombroso to take the pessimistic line. There are
various types of crime which require a certain degree of general and
especially technical education, and the modern criminal has often to

633

GROUPS AS FACTORS IN CRIME

narrow technical education merely to enable him to become a more
proficient safe-breaker. And if he, a man of obvious ability and
fairly wide reading tastes, had such doubts, what can one expect from
his weaker brethren? In spite of such handicaps determined efforts
are now made by the Prison Administrations of several countries to
bring the possibility of a modicum of education, in both senses of the
word, to many prisoners and other inmates of penal and correctional
institutions. 119 Even if their success as a crime-preventing factor
cannot be statistically proved, such efforts are worth while for their
own sake. They need not necessarily stand in the way of sterner
measures against serious professional and organized criminals (Chap-
ter 25 below).

635

Chapter 25

GROUPS AS FACTORS IN CRIME II
B. ASSOCIATIONS IN CRIME: OCCASIONAL
CO-OPERATION OF A FEW. THE CROWD.
ORGANIZED CRIME: ADULT AND ADOLESCENT
GANGS. THE VICTIM OF CRIME

I. INTRODUCTORY 1

The participation of two or more persons in the commission of
crime is as old as crime itself. Even if we should not accept Freud’s
theory of the murder of the primal father by his sons as one of the
earliest crimes known to mankind, standing at the beginning of
human morality (see above. Chapter 17), such joining of forces for
criminal purposes must be of very ancient origin. Cain, it is true,
appears as a lonely slayer, but if we regard the killings done in the
pursuit of blood vengeance as crimes, we find here an institution
which, by imposing on the whole tribe the duty to execute an act of
collective blood vengeance, was likely to foster co-operation between
individual members of the tribe. In modern society the need for co-
operation in crime has other roots. It is the growing complexity of
modem life which makes such arrangements essential not only in
ordinary business pursuits, but equally in criminal activities which
differ from lawful ones mainly in the fact that the latter are permitted
and the former proscribed. With only very slight exaggeration we can
say that whatever is produced in our society — with the exception of
highly individual works of art — is the product of the combined
activities of a number of human beings. If in the field of crime this is
true only to a somewhat lesser degree the reason for the difference lies
in the natural reluctance of offenders to run the risks involved in
collaboration; but even so the practical significance of associations in
crime is very great and still growing. The subject under discussion in
the present chapter has of course to be distinguished from the
kindred one where crime is the outcome of the atmosphere prevailing
in certain sections or sub-sections of our society without actual col-

636

ASSOCIATIONS IN CRIME

laboration of several of its members. To this latter aspect attention
has been drawn above in Chapter 21.

There are many potential shades of criminal association, and
various typologies could be produced. It is here proposed to distin-
guish four principal types: first, two types showing no or only a very
loose form of organization and cohesion, i.e. (1) the occasional
getting together of a small number of persons for the commission of
offences; (2) at the other extreme, the crowd which, though also of an
occasional, transitory, character, consists of a large number of in-
dividuals; secondly, two types possessing a more or less tight form of
organization and cohesion, i.e. (3) the gang, juvenile or adult, and
similar forms of organized crime; (4) the corporation which, though
usually established with lawful objectives in mind and throughout its
existence mainly pursuing such objectives, nevertheless does not
refrain from legally proscribed practices if they are deemed necessary
in the interest of profit-making. With this last type, which has been
dealt with in connection with white collar crime (Chapter 21 above),
we are not concerned here.

Comparing our typology of collective behaviour with that used by
some present-day sociologists we find that theirs is, quite naturally,
much more comprehensive. Smelser, for example, whose valuable
monograph contains one of the most recent treatments of the subject
(see Note 1), covers the following types: ‘(1) the panic-response; (2)
the craze response . . .; (3) the hostile outburst; (4) the norm-
oriented movement, including the social reform movement; (5) the
value-oriented movement, including the political and religious re-
volution . . .’ (p. 2). As will be seen at once, this covers criminal and
non-criminal forms of collective behaviour alike, and it is difficult to
understand why Smelser wishes to exclude the criminal association
from his scheme.

Some sociologists are also inclined to exclude the ‘small group’
from the term ‘collective behaviour’, 2 and it should be made clear
that we also disagree with this view. 3

II. THE OCCASIONAL CRIMINAL CO-OPERATION OF A SMALL
NUMBER OF PERSONS 4

1. Legal Points

This is the most frequent and most natural form of co-operation in
crime in both primitive and highly developed societies. It is signi-
ficant that the criminal law, true to its individualistic character, has
devoted most of its energies to the working out of concepts dealing
with this form of association, at the expense of the development of
provisions designed to cope with those forms where larger numbers of

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

participants are concerned. At the same time, in spite of this abun-
dance of legal sophistry and casuistry, no system of criminal law and
jurisprudence has so far succeeded in producing a satisfactory solu-
tion of the criminological problems of complicity. Pure legal dogma-
tism has all too often been the deadly enemy of common sense and
criminological experience. Vouin and Leaute 5 call the French theory
of complicity archaic, though to some extent modernized by legis-
lation and jurisprudence. In English law, which is hardly more ad-
vanced, there are four main degrees of criminal participation in
felonies: principal in the first degree, principal in the second degree,
accessory before the fact, accessory after the fact. In most other legal
systems corresponding classifications can be found. The practical
significance of these legal distinctions varies; in some countries it is
considerable, which may provoke much legal hair-splitting on the
part of the courts and commentators ; in other countries the distinc-
tions are of little importance, and a great deal of discretion is left to
the courts. The Soviet Penal Code of 1926, § 18, chose the second
way, leaving it to the courts to impose penalties on each participant
‘with due regard to the extent of his participation in the crime and to
the extent of the danger which he or the crime constitutes’. The
‘Basic Principles’ of 1958° add definitions of the various forms of
participation which do not fundamentally deviate from the tradi-
tional ones, but leave the distinctions regarding penalties again en-
tirely to the courts. And, after all, what else can the legislator do in the
face of the endless variety of human entanglements which constitute
what we, in grotesque over-simplification, call ‘association in crime’ ?

One has only to read the carefully reasoned analysis of the English
law on the subject by Glanville Williams to realize how many
dogmatic pitfalls may stand in the way of criminologically acceptable
solutions. 7 To give two or three examples, the rule that a person can
be guilty of ‘aiding and abetting’ the actual perpetrator (principal in
the first degree) and be punished as a ‘principal in the second degree’
only if he knowingly assists or encourages at the time of the crime,
whether present or not, or if he is present at the time of the crime,
whether or not he in fact assists (except by acquiescence), has given
rise to very subtle and often unrealistic distinctions as to the meaning
of ‘presence’ and ‘time of the crime’ (pp. 181-3). Or, ‘one who does
not counsel any crime does not become guilty as accessory merely
because the crime was a probable result of his conduct’; therefore, if
‘D sells counterfeit notes to E, and E sells them to F, all three parties
knowing they are counterfeit’, and F passes the notes, D is not an
accessory to the uttering by F (p. 189); nor of course do the pro-
ducers of a film stimulating the viewers to break the law commit an
offence in the absence of criminal intent (p. 188). This leads to the

638

ASSOCIATIONS IN CRIME

equally vexed question of ‘supply of materials and information’ (pp.
190-203), where the legitimate, and occasionally even the illegitimate,
needs of the trade have enforced a very restrictive application of the
criminal law. Glanville Williams suggests the creation of a special
statute to punish the suppliers of material who know that it is in-
tended for criminal purposes. Von Hentig, who in several mono-
graphs has produced a wealth of case material on various aspects of
complicity for the crimes of murder, false pretences, larceny, bur-
glary, robbery, and blackmail (see Note 4), has unceasingly poured
scorn on the rigidity and narrowness of the relevant legal provisions
and the unreality of their distinctions. Subjective elements play no
doubt an important role in determining whether a person is guilty of
complicity— ‘the accessory must intend the crime’ (Glanville Wil-
liams, p. 1S8). Nevertheless, the emphasis on subjective elements can
be overdone, 8 and Hentig may not be wrong when he tries to show
that the rather clumsy ways in which law and courts handle these very
subtle subjective factors may do no justice to the essential features of
a case.® This all the more so as law and courts usually have to concen-
trate too much on the particular crime which is brought before the
court, at the expense of the interpretation of the whole background
and the total personalities of those involved and their relationship.
Glanville Williams rightly stresses that ‘the crime instigated must
have an element of particularity’ (p. 190), i.e. the instigator must have
one particular crime in mind, although he need not know all its
details beforehand, 10 but whether this legal restriction can do justice
to the psychological impact of the personality of the instigator on
that of the actual perpetrator is another question. The need for legal
safeguards often clashes with psychological and sociological facts.
Occasionally, these legal provisions may lead to absurd decisions, as,
for example in the notorious Croydon case of] 952, when two youths,
after an act of house-breaking, were chased by the police over a roof-
top and one of them shot and killed a policeman. Being only 1 6 years
old, he was sent to prison for an indefinite period. The other, Derek
Bentley, aged 19, was sentenced to death and hanged, although lie had
no gun in his possession, because he had called out to the other ‘Let
them have it, Chris’. At the time of the killing Bentley had already
been under arrest for 1 5 minutes, and he was regarded as a borderline
mental defective. 11

In the field of criminal procedure, too, the association of several
persons can lead to technical difficulties, for example when it has to be
decided whether there should be a joint trial for all of them or whe-
ther each or some of them should stand trial separately. This is not
the place, however, to go into these intricate procedural matters, some
ofwhich are closely connected with the special needs of trial by jury. 18

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

2. Criminological Aspects

The psychological entanglements of personalities which, to the great
embarrassment of the law, can so often be found at the root of cases
where two or three persons are somehow involved are of course of far
greater interest to the criminologist than the legal categories of
principal in the first or second degree, or instigator, or accessory
before or after the fact. Particularly illuminating is in this respect Sir
James Fitzjamcs Stephens’ view referred to by Glanville Williams,
that lago could not have been convicted as ‘accessory before the fact’
to Desdemona’s murder but for his remark: ‘Do it not with poison,
strangle her in her bed’, a view with which Williams does not
entirely agree (p. 189). Would the criminologists have shared
Stephen’s doubt? He would be interested in such chance remarks
mainly as far as they reveal the state of mind of the person ; he would
use them to hang a person only if they are in keeping with the whole
role the latter has been playing throughout the various stages of the
drama which eventually led to the crime. The psychological guilt of
the instigator is often much stronger than that of the actual killer —
especially of course in the case where he makes use of a so-called
‘innocent agent’ (Williams, p. 178, in German law mittelbarer Tater).
In other cases, however, the opposite is true, and there may be all the
difference between one who, perhaps without much thought and in a
moment of great emotion, rather carelessly put the idea into the
associate’s head and the latter who executes the killing in circum-
stances quite different and far more brutally than envisaged by the
instigator. The court may not always be able to give sufficient weight
to such differences.

Notwithstanding the infinite variety of possible combinations cer-
tain main patterns emerge fairly distinctly. Pinatel, Hcntig and
Trottier have, each in his own way, successfully attempted to bring
something of a system into the seemingly baffling diversity of cases.
Pinatel is mainly interested in the mattre-esclave relationship, where
one of the two partners commands and the other obeys, in the
couples amoureux et conjugal, and in the parent-child relationship.
He draws special attention to the attraction which often exists
between persons of opposite physical and psychological character-
istics — les extremes se touchcnt — and the ensuing state of love-hate.
The relationship between a couple of lovers may not only lead to
crimes against one of them and third persons, husbands, wives,
parents, or outsiders, who in whatever form stand in their way (Mac-
beth!), but also more specifically to abortion and infanticide, with the
man here usually acting as instigator. The parent-child relationship is

640

ASSOCIATIONS IN CRIME

equally replete with criminogenic situations, notably the mother-son
relationship as potentially leading to parricide and the father-
daughter relationship with its risk of incest. Cases have been reported
of mothers inciting their grown-up son's to prolonged incestual rela-
tions, in order to prevent them from going to prostitutes. 13 An
excellent survey of the various types of incestuous relationships has
recently been given by Irving R. Weiner. 14

In a short but important paper the French-Canadian Michel Trot-
tier (see Note 4) presents three cases of partnership in crime to show
that, while the role of each partner in these small groups of two to
four people reflects his individual personality, nevertheless the col-
lective decision may differ from that which each member would have
taken if he had been acting in isolation ; in other words, the group may
commit crimes from which each member alone would have refrained.
In one of the cases, two latecomers to crime plan a robbery but can-
not muster the courage to carry it out until they succeed in finding a
third man, a recividist, under whose direction the crime is jointly
completed; the individual consciences are temporarily stifled and
supplanted by the criminal super-ego of the habitual criminal. After
arrest and punishment, however, the two beginners regain their true
personalities and shake off any relationship with the third man. In
another case of a group consisting only of two lovers, the man, a
frustrated spoilt child, meets a girl with a criminal past who makes
excessive financial demands on him which he can satisfy only by
crime. Their personalities are similar in that they have been used to
exploit others for their selfish purposes, but in their relationship each
of them uses the other for different objects, and they are not real
partners in crime; the girl exploits the man in the same way as he
used to exploit his parents, they ‘operate separately but as a function
of each other’. Particularly dangerous are such small associations
when one of the members is a mentally deranged person. In July
1963 two Liverpool girls, aged 16 and 17, went on a hitch-hiking
holiday to the South-West. They were given a lift by three young men
passing them in a van who, after a while, drove into a side lane where
one of them attacked the girls, killing one of them and severely
injuring the other, while another of the men covered the girls and the
third man with a gun. The latter, the driver of the van, who un-
successfully and feebly tried to restrain his companions from assault-
ing the girls, was discharged. 15 This case is also instructive as showing
that in small-size associations individual responsibility can be dis-
tinctly assessed for each member. If the principle of English law
(s. 1 above) that mere presence plus acquiescence may be sufficient to
establish co-responsibility should be taken too literally the driver of
the van might have been a principal in the second degree, but as he

ccn — q 641

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

protested and was himself threatened by the gunman he could be
discharged, although without the assistance of his van the crime
would probably not have been committed. If the association is very
large, as in the case of crowds, such individual assessment of respon-
sibility usually becomes highly superficial.

v. Iientig’s writings on the subject, supported by ample case mater-
ial, have the special merit that, as already mentioned, they are classi-
fied according to the various types of crime with which he is con-
cerned: murder ; theft, burglary, robbery; false pretences; blackmail.
Naturally, the characteristics of the associations described often vary
in accordance with those of the crimes; in cases of murder the associ-
ation is likely to be more emotional than in crimes against property.
There is, moreover, the fear aroused by the heavier penalties. Accord-
ingly, the ‘battle between the associates’, after detection and arrest,
their mutual hatreds and incriminations, are usually more bitter and
vehement here than those between unsuccessful thieves or swindlers.
This is particularly so where two lovers who have jointly killed the
wife’s husband accuse each other of having been the driving force.
Often enough the partner becomes a victim, too, in order to avoid
such risks. Family groups, in particular those of brothers, are
usually more reliable and stand together right to the end, whereas
associations of two lovers are more likely to collapse under the strain
of the trial, which may lead to a mental breakdown, confession and
attempted suicide of one partner.

There are persons who are destined to be instigators and others
destined to be perpetrators; physical and psychological character-
istics are here decisive. 16 Usually, the female sex is more suitable for
the roles of instigator, for aiding and abetting, the male more for the
actual physical execution of the plot as a ‘principal in the first
degree’ (see also below, Chapter 26). 17

Murder can be, and usually is, committed by one person; the risk
of betrayal is too great to make associations here very popular, but
for physical or emotional reasons the burden may be too great for
one person to bear or the decisive stimulus may have to come from a
third person. Criminal statistics give only very rudimentary informa-
tion on the proportion of ‘murder by association’. 18 False pretences,
confidence tricks, and the like are probably more often dependent on
the carefully planned collaboration of a few tricksters. The pro-
spective victim is more easily reassured and persuaded to part with
his, or her, money if the principal actor can, at the critical moment,
produce an apparent outsider to confirm his story. Each of the players
may have to represent a different type in his external appearance as
well as in his specific gifts, educational equipment and manners ; each
of them in short has to play a different role. If the plot is too corn-

642

ASSOCIATIONS IN CRIME

plicated and requires more than two or three roles, the organization
may exceed the resources and the usual personnel of the small
group with which we are at present concerned and may become a
‘gang’ (s. IV below). In this connection, Hentig refers to the analysis
given by Wiirtenberger 19 of the various forms of collaboration needed
by art forgers and the sellers of faked works of art: agents, middle-
men, minor painters, occasionally real experts who have become
financially all-too dependent on the criminals.

For burglaries v. Hentig thinks that modern techniques of safe-
breaking, etc., have reduced the number of persons required for an
expert job, 20 and this may be true for the highly skilled men who are
real masters of their craft and will limit the number of their associates,
if any,. to the barest minimum. Amateurs and especially young
beginners will be careless in the selection of their helpers and they
will also far more easily succumb to the danger of committing an
incidental act of homicide whenever meeting an unexpected obstacle.
In this way, mere bank hold-ups and similar armed robberies may
end in murder trials. The Worthing bank hold-up of 1961 is a case in
point, 21 but in the superficially similar case of the armed raid on the
Royal Arsenal Co-operative Society at Mitcham, Surrey, in Novem-
ber 1963 a far more experienced adult gang made the same blunder. 22

In most cases of professional larcenies, burglaries, and robberies,
whether committed by small groups or by larger gangs, the relation-
ship between them and the receiver is of crucial importance. Receiving
has been made a separate offence in the criminal law, 23 but the legal
line between being a receiver and being an accessory to the crime is
not always easy to draw. 24 To the criminologist, the receiver, while
one of the most important figures in the rogues’ gallery, appears to be
part of an organized gang rather than of a small group of thieves, but
whether he stands behind a large gang or a small, unorganized group,
he can hardly ever be regarded as one of its members.

Certain types of blackmail, too, are based on the collaboration of
two or three persons. For example there is the typical case of the
woman, who leads a wealthy married man into an awkward sexual
situation in which they are ‘surprised’ by somebody posing as her
outraged husband who has then to be bought off by interminable
payments of money. The same trick can be played against a wealthy
lady where the ‘wife’ of the seducer enters the scene. 25

III. THE CROWD 26

1. Definition

The crowd has this in common with the small association dealt with
in Section II that its organization, if any, is only rudimentary and that

643

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

it usually lasts for a short period only. In fact, continuity is even
rarer here than in the case of small associations of two or three who,
if successful, may remain together for a whole series of exploits!
While this will not happen in cases of murder, burglars, swindlers
and blackmailers may, without having any formal organizational
links, collaborate for years or return to their old small cliques again
and again after serving their prison sentences. Clemmer refers to the
‘complete clique man’ in and out of prison. 27 In fact, this common
habit of the habitual criminal after discharge to rejoin their former
associates is generally regarded as one of the major obstacles to
reform.

On the other hand, the crowd differs from the small association in
that it is far more numerous. Here as throughout in such questions of
definition no absolute figures can be quoted to decide the minimum
required to make a crowd, but it will probably have to be at least a
dozen. This question of numbers, however, is not the only defini-
tional difficulty. Not every agglomeration of considerable numbers of
individuals constitutes a crowd; there must, in addition, be an en-
vironmental and a mental ‘something’ which transforms the purely
factual agglomeration into a crowd in the psychological sense. This
‘something’ may be called *a centre or point of common attention’
(Sprott); it may be a sudden happening which attracts the interest of
the individuals present. McDougall 28 gives the example of the ‘dense
gathering of several hundred individuals at the Mansion House
crossing at noon of every weekday’; they do not yet form a psycho-
logical crowd because they have no common interests to bind them
together, however temporarily. But if a fire-engine should come along
galloping through the traffic or the Lord Mayor’s state coach arrives
these happenings produce a common link between those present
which transforms them into a psychological crowd. It is this ‘some-
thing’ which produces many of the characteristics which, as will be
shown below, may make the crowd potentially dangerous.

2. The Characteristics of the Crowd

It is a matter of great interest to observe that scientific attitudes to the
problems of the crowd have, in the past seventy or eighty years,
undergone changes similar to those which were described above
(Chapter 23) with regard to the film and other media of mass enter-
tainment, with the difference perhaps that the literature on crowds
began somewhat earlier than that on films because the latter, for
technical reasons, made their appearance at a later stage, whereas
there have been crowds already in olden times. However, as the
earliest critics of the film were over-inclined to concentrate on its

644

ASSOCIATIONS IN CRIME

dangers, so we find in the writings of the late nineteenth-century
pioneers of crowd research, the Italian Scipio Sighele and the
Frenchmen Tarde and Le Bon, a similar over-emphasis on the anti-
social tendencies of crowd behaviour. In both cases there is further-
more the same undue simplification and an exaggerated belief in the
strength of suggestion, hypnosis, and imitation, although it has to be
stressed that even those older writers were by no means quite as one-
sided in their condemnation of crowd behaviour as is often believed.

The reaction came soon after the First World War. While Freud
accepted many of Le Bon’s views as supporting his own theory of the
unconscious and of identification, most early twentieth-century
psychologists and sociologists opposed them very sharply, and it was
only natural that in the course of this process occasionally a picture
of the crowd emerged which was as over-sympathetic as that of
previous writers had been over-critical. It has been the task of
present-day social scientists to restore the balance, a task which is
still far from being completed.

Which are the main characteristics ascribed to the crowd by Le
Bon and his school and of what kind are the main criticisms directed
against their theory? Apart from the quantitative aspect and the
psychological ‘something’ which are essential to the definition of the
crowd (s. 1 above) these characteristics are according to Le Bon as
follows: 20

(a) Through joining a crowd, the individual members undergo
profound psychological and moral changes in their personalities
and their ways of thinking, feeling and acting.

( b ) These changes involve a wholesale intellectual and moral de-
gradation and a loss of previously cherished values. In fact, the in-
dividual member suddenly climbs down to the level of the lowest
components of the crowd and adopts their ways of thought and
feeling.

(c) This leads to a complete loss of the sense of personal respon-
sibility for one’s own actions and, on the other hand, to the acquisi-
tion of an uncritical belief in the invincible power and the justice of
the cause of the crowd, coupled with an equally uncritical conviction
of the worthlessness of the opposing forces. ‘Fifty thousand French-
men can’t be wrong’ — even if they should do the most outrageous
things. In a crowd, men are over-credulous, apt to exaggerate, and to
believe even the silliest rumours.

(d) There is therefore a feeling of security and a unity of purpose
among the crowd to a degree not normally achieved outside a crowd
by a number of individuals acting together, and its actions are subject
to sudden, illogical and unexpected changes of direction,- which
make them unpredictable and dangerous,

645

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

(e) All this has to be explained as the outcome of the psychological
forces of suggestion, contagion, imitation, and hypnosis.

Le Bon went so far as to postulate the existence of the crowd as a
separate entity with its own group mind and to formulate his
psychological loi de Vunite mentale des Joules (Part I, Chapter 1), the
law of the psychological unity of the crowd.

As already indicated, while the main emphasis of the Le Bon
school of thought is on the degrading and criminogenic effects of the
crowd, they were also willing to admit its potentially valuable and
heroic moral qualities. Le Bon even takes the view that crowds
rarely act out of selfish motives and he refers to the Crusades and the
enthusiasm and the unselfish deeds of the volunteers in the wars of the
French Revolution; 30 it is doubtful, however, whether these are not
rather examples of more or less organized groups. Here as in many
other ways it becomes clear that Le Bon (1871-1931), who was a
medical man by profession, and perhaps also Sighele and Tarde,
although no contemporaries of the French Revolution, were still
spiritually much under the influence of the events of that period.
Among his books was a work on the French Revolution, and again
and again he refers to those years to demonstrate the criminogenic
characteristics of the crowd, while on the other hand trying to excuse
its outrages as manifestations of political and religious fervour. 31
For outrages such as those committed by the French Revolutionaries
the actors can, he thinks, be held responsible only in a legal, not how-
ever in a psychological sense. He could not foresee that, barely half a
century after he wrote this, crimes at least as outrageous but on a
vastly larger scale were committed by men who could be, and were
actually, held responsible in every sense of the word.

There is a fair amount of agreement that, whatever psychological
effects membership of a crowd may have, they will differ according to
national temperament and political conditions. As a rule, a crowd
will behave differently in southern Mediterranean and in northern
countries, in a country with a long-established democratic tradition
and in one ruled by a rigid totalitarian regime. ‘Even in civilized
countries a crowd can become dangerous and uncontrollable’, wrote
Herbert Agar in a little wartime book which is still worth reading, 32
but once the tumult is over those who were in the crowd usually
return to their normal peaceful occupations. ‘In a tyrant state,
however, the crowd never breaks up. It has no groups to return to,
nothing to re-introduce sanity and order and discipline into its over-
excited mind.’ Or, as Drucker expresses it, in a totalitarian state the
members of the crowd ‘must convince themselves collectively that
theirs is the right society’, 33 and this has to be achieved through ever-
increasing violence and brutality against outsiders.

646

ASSOCIATIONS IN CRIME

There are still occasional voices reminiscent of the Le Bon doc-
trine, 34 but they are becoming rarer and less extreme under the impact
of the criticisms directed against it. What are the main arguments of
the critics? Let us make it clear at once that, except for Le Bon’s now
universally rejected concept of the group mind, most of the differences
between the Le Bon school and their modem opponents are of
degree only. There is hardly any quarrel with the view that human
beings in a crowd are likely to behave differently from the way they
would behave in isolation. This is in no way limited to crowds
whose actions result in criminal outrages ; it is also true of crowds in a
state of panic injuring only their own members. To illustrate this two
examples taken from the English war and post-war years may suffice :
the events at a London tube station shelter on the 3rd March 1943,
where 173 persons were crushed to death and nearly a hundred in-
jured, and the happenings at the Bolton Wanderers’ football ground
on the 9th March 1946 , when 33 persons died and hundreds were in-
jured, ‘the first example in the history of football of serious casualties
inflicted by a crowd upon itself’. 36

However, whereas according to Le Bon the individual by joining a
crowd underwent a process of wholesale degradation, suddenly
tumbling down the whole of the moral and intellectual ladder on
which he stands, we nowadays believe that he falls no more than a
mere one or two rungs. Whereas to Le Bon individual differences
between crowd members hardly mattered, their importance is now
duly emphasized, and it is also admitted that there are people who are
altogether immune from the impact of the crowd. 36 Even among the
others the feeling of personal responsibility is not entirely stifled as
soon as they enter the crowd, except perhaps for those few hard-
boiled evil-doers who exploit the chaotic situation created by it for
their own sinister purposes; they, however, do not really belong to
the crowd although they move in the midst of it. 37

Other critics have pointed out that Le Bon apparently took it for
granted that the individual, left to himself, was good and reasonable
and incapable of crimes as revolting as those sometimes committed by
crowds— an assumption which the history of crime has shown to be
wrong. ‘One is always inclined to lay the blame on external circum-
stances, but nothing could explode in us if it had not been there.’ 38
Le Bon, it has been said, was so successful because he flattered the
individual. 33 In fact, ‘the tendency to lose one’s head is a normal part
of the situation’ when people are confronted by immediate danger. 40

. short, Le Bon’s radical, qualitative, distinction between indi-
vidual and crowd behaviour has been replaced by a purely quantita-
tive one, succinctly expressed in F. H. Allport’s formula that the
individual in the crowd behaves as he would behave if alone, ‘only

64 7

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

more so’. 41 Or should we perhaps rather say * much more so’ ? One has
only to compare Le Bon’s views even in his own special field, the
French Revolution, with the work of modern historians such as Rude
and others to appreciate the progress made in these past seventy years
from what was after all not much more than a kind of popular, at
best semi-scientific, writing to the highly specialized historical and
sociological studies of the present time. Nevertheless, Le Bon and
Sighele should be given credit for the stimulus and the challenge they
have provided to their successors.

Modern social psychologists have tried more objectively to define
the various factors required to produce mass violence. Miller and
Dollard distinguish three variables: the drive stimulus, which would
operate in the individual when alone; the crowd stimulus; and the
strength of response under the impact of these two stimuli. 42 Robin
M. Williams lists the following conditions as most likely to provoke
mass violence, in particular race riots: prolonged frustration causing
high tension, the presence of elements anyhow inclined towards
violence, marked changes in intergroup relations, and a precipitating
incident. 43 The latter may be a gun shot or a blow, 44 but it may also be
a rumour that something outrageous had been done by members of
the opposite camp, for example, a white woman raped by a Negro,
Smelser refers to Allport and Postman’s ‘law of social psychology’
that no riot ever arose without rumour. 45 It has to be borne in mind,
of course, that precipitating events play their fateful part not only in
crowd outrages but also in most individual crimes of violence. Here,
too, one provocative word may decide the issue; ‘I might not have
done what I did if she had remained silent’, says Pozdnishev in
Tolstoy’s Kreutzer Sonata.

3. The Different Components of the Crowd

Within the crowd we have to distinguish three parts: (a) the active
minority, of which the most important elements are (b) the leaders; at
the other extreme there is (c) the passive majority, the followers. The
existence of these three components is one of the factors which are
peculiar to the crowd in the psychological sense as distinct from the
mere agglomeration (s. 1 above), which is unclassified and may have
no leader. The phenomenon of leadership is one of the fundamental
elements and one of the great themes of history, politics, religion, and
social psychology; it has been studied in all conceivable contexts
from Max Weber’s charismatic leader to that of a criminal or juvenile
gang. It has been discredited by Hitler, Mussolini, and Stalin, but it is
still indispensable for an understanding of human groups. Freud
regarded it as a case of projection of the super-egos of the members

ASSOCIATIONS IN CRIME

on to the person of the leader as a father-figure, a theory which may
be true but does not help us very much. Le Bon is particularly weak
on the subject. His leaders are mostly political or religious figures,
some of them men of action, nervous, irritable, half-mad, skilful
orators who only pursue their own personal interests; others may be
men of deep convictions and belief in the sacredness of their cause,
such as Peter of Amiens, Luther, Savonarola. Apart from the role
played by the French revolutionaries, there is nothing in Le Bon’s
book on the leader of criminal crowds. It might possibly be doubted
whether a crowd in the sense of our present discussion can have a
leader at all, i.e. whether the existence of such a figure does not run
contrary to the character of a crowd as a short-lived agglomeration
of people with only the barest minimum of organization. However,
considering the additional ‘something’ needed to produce a psycho-
logical crowd (s. 1 above) it is clear that in its formation, direction,
domination, and exploitation a leader figure, while not essential, can
play an all-important role. It is a very temporary role only, executive
rather than organizational. 48 Nevertheless, it is going too far when
some writers 47 regard the leader as nothing but the personification of
the emotional drives of the crowd, entirely dependent upon its whims
and, without any will of his own, merely giving expression to its
fleeting impulses. It is only consequent that according to this view the
leader of a criminal crowd is neither legally nor morally responsible
for its actions. To us this seems an undue generalization of a highly
complex phenomenon. It has to be borne in mind that there is a
mutual, not a one-sided, relationship between a crowd and its
leaders, each of the two sectors influencing the other and being in-
fluenced by it. The leader is not immune to the atmosphere and the
stimulus emanating from his followers; he is susceptible to their
presence and their actions. Which of the two is the stronger depends
on their personalities and the specific situation. We have only to
consider the extreme case of what is probably the most famous poeti-
cal presentation of the leader-crowd relationship, Mark Antony’s
funeral oration in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, to become aware of
the potential impact of a leader of genius and to realize his responsi-
bility for the actions of the crowd. The recent political history of
Europe has done nothing to prove Shakespeare’s imagination to be
unrealistic. A considerable literature exists on the great diversity of
the roles played by leaders in hostile outbursts. ‘On some occasions,’
writes Smelser, 48 ‘a highly motivated, daring, psychopathic, etc., in-
dividual will deliberately harangue a group to action.’ Rudd, who of
course deals only with the crowds of the French Revolution, gives
many interesting details to show how important it is to avoid
generalizations on the lines of Le Bon. There were during that period

649

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

instances of crowds whose members had, already before the crowd
came into existence, been won over individually to the objects of the
demonstration and whose mentality corresponded closely to that of
the crowd; here the transformation into a crowd was effected not by
anything the leaders had done, and its coming into existence was
rather due to such objective events as a sudden rise in the price of
bread and the fear of starvation. 49 Nor could the outrages committed
by these revolutionary crowds always be ascribed to criminal ele-
ments drawn from the dregs of the city. In Britain, too, the rural
riots of the eighteenth century originated in the high price of corn;
they, and the Gordon riots, were rather movements of social protest.
Towards the end of the eighteenth century these food riots were,
according to Rude, more and more replaced by strikes, 60 a statement
which is of course also something of an over-generalization. It is true
however that the strike, with the exception of unexpected and un-
organized wild-cat strikes, is a planned movement quite different
from a food riot.

Illuminating on this subject, the role of the crowd leader, is the
detailed description given by Christopher Hibbert in his King Mob of
the behaviour of Lord George Gordon during the various stages of
his riots. As the leader of the crowd of ‘Petitioners’ he constantly
moved about ‘inside and outside the House of Commons’ to keep his
people informed about what was being said inside, ‘extravagantly
agitated . . . (and) so intoxicated by the sound of the hundreds of
voices shouting his name that he was unaware that most of the
reasonable petitioners had gone home, leaving behind them a mis-
chief-making and violence-hungry rabble ... yet on occasions he
seemed to realize, despite his hysteria, . . . that he had started some-
thing dangerous which was now beyond his power to stop’ (p. 44).
Similar observations could probably be made with regard to the
activities of modern leaders of crowds committing outrages in the
course of race riots, political or religious demonstrations, and un-
organized strikes.

No less diversified than the character and role of the leaders are the
other components of the crowd and the numerical proportion be-
tween its active minority and the passive majority. In other words,
how many of those who join a crowd will remain passive and how
many will actively participate in hostile or even criminal action may
depend on their backgrounds, personalities, and the national tem-
perament, on the issues involved, on the ability of the leaders to
arouse their passions, perhaps on the weather, and so oil

Apart from the literature already quoted, we find interesting
material on the leadership and other problems of the crowd in
Gunther Kaiser’s monograph on the German Halbstarken-Krawalle

650

ASSOCIATIONS IN CRIME

of the 1950’s. He stresses the unorganized nature of these groups of
youngsters which possessed none of the characteristics of the gang;
anything involving a tie, a commitment, in short any kind of organ-
ization, was shunned by these boys, 51 Therefore no real leaders could
be found, only spokesmen or Hauptschlager, i.e. boys who are
stronger, more violent and reckless and commit worse excesses than
the others and egg them on to further outrages. Consequently, very
few of those brought before the courts in connection with such riots
could be convicted as ‘leaders’ ( Kddehfuhrer according to §§ 1 15 and
125 of the German Code, which provide heavier penalties for the
leaders).

With regard to the proportion of the various components of these
crowds, Kaiser has observed that in the German ‘rock-and-roll’
meetings which were often the starting points of serious riots, there
were usually 5-15 young people to be found in the centre of events,
performing grotesque contortions, with about 20-60 others standing
around shouting and applauding, whereas a crowd of a hundred or
more was watching approvingly from a distance. For such occasions,
Kaiser regards this as the typical distribution of the forces. 52 In the
Chicago race riots of 1919, the mob, though ‘one in spirit’, was
‘divided in performance into a small active nucleus and a large pro-
portion of spectators’, with the nucleus consisting of perhaps 4 to 25
or 50 and the spectators numbering 250-300. 63

Kaiser and, at some greater detail, Fyvel 54 review the international •
phenomenon of these mass outbreaks of adolescent lawlessness
caused, to stress his point again, not by gangs but by casually
assembled crowds of youths, from Sweden to Germany, France,
Britain, Italy, Austria, and even Switzerland. Everywhere the under-
lying causes of the malaise seem to go down very deep to the roots of
our affluent society, although at least in Fyvel’s view in most Con-
tinental countries the ‘traditional bourgeois standards’ have sur-
vived and been capable of fighting back more effectively than in
Britain and the United States.

4. Some Special Types of Crowd Rioting

(a) Riots in prisons and similar institutions are, strictly speaking, not
committed by crowds as the term is here used because they are not
the work of people suddenly flocking together without any previous
organizational connections behind them. Nevertheless, such riots
have much in common with crowd rioting in its narrow sense and are
often discussed together with it. 55 The literature on the subject con-
tains valuable material on mass crime and on leadership ; references
were given by the present writer in an earlier book, 66 and not very

651

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

much has been added since then, as the worst period in American
prison rioting seems to be over. On the special aspect of leadership
in prison riots Negley K. Teeters probably voices the prevailing
opinion when he writes: ‘To blame a few disgruntled, hard-boiled
criminals for a riot is naive and unrealistic although popular.’ 67 It
may be more realistic to blame a few psychopaths for it.

As in the case of the mass movements, peasants’ riots and others
referred to before, one of the strongest underlying causes of many
institutional disturbances is the desire to obtain redress for real or
imaginary grievances. The report on the disturbances at the Carlton
Approved School for senior boys in Bedfordshire, in August 1959, 68
provides an excellent illustration of how the various factors combine
to produce an institutional riot. To put the findings of the report in a
nutshell: ‘two main underlying causes . . . first, the insufficient devel-
opment of the personal relations’ between staff and boys, which in-
volved among other weaknesses ‘the inadequacy of positive arrange-
ments for the airing and clearing of boys’ grievances’, depriving the
school of a most essential safety valve; and, secondly, the deteriora-
tion in the type of boy: ‘Anti-social and anti-authority characteristics
among boys committed for training over the last two years have in-
creased and worsened in that period . . . Boys having the right
qualities for choice as house captains and leaders are now difficult to
find at Carlton School.’ There was a hard core of trouble-makers, and
no machinery to remove them in time; nor had the school the ser-
vices of a psychiatrist, although a number of boys who had been the
subjects of psychiatric reports had been received from the classifying
school. Moreover, the boys had harboured a number of grievances,
some real, some imaginary; and finally, the publicity given to the
initial disorders in certain parts of the press ‘heightened the attitude
of bravado’ and encouraged a repetition.

( b ) Race riots are more frequent and of greater practical importance
than institutional riots. They are also more typical products of
crowds in the narrower sense, with usually little organization behind,
or if organizations should be involved, many of the actual partici-
pants may not actually belong to them. While the classic countries of
race riots have so far been the United States and the Indian peninsula,
several others have followed suit in the course of this century, for
example South Africa, 60 Egypt, 00 British Guiana, 61 and Britain, to
mention only a few of them. Some of these riots were mainly political
and economic in origin, but racial factors were hardly ever absent.
Naturally, there is more information available on events in Britain
than on those abroad, and reference was already made to them above
(Chapter 23). While we were there approaching the crime problem
from the racial angle, especially from the point of view of crime

652

associations in crime

among racial minorities, we are now concerned more specifically
with the impact of race on crowd rioting. Racial antagonism provides
an ideal background for such riots: ready-made mistrust, jealousy,
hatred, lack of understanding of the other person’s way of life,
problems, and reactions to stress, the easy spreading of rumours —
all these factors make it only natural that at the slightest provocation
—real or imaginary— hostile crowds may gather and riot against
racial minorities. With the increasing influx of coloured immigrants
after the Second World War the wave of such riots was bound to
spread to Britain, culminating in the outbreaks at the Notting Hill
area of London, and in Nottingham in August-September, 1958. It
has occasionally been maintained that these outbreaks were essen-
tially non-racial since various other factors such as overcrowding
‘lowering the standard of the district’, and many others mentioned
above (Chapter 23) played an important part in them. 62 The presence
of such other factors, however, quite inevitable in accordance with
the multi-factor theory of crime causation, does not detract from the
racial character of these outbreaks, which would probably not have
occurred if racial antagonism had not provided the obvious direction
and the driving force. Other writers have pointed out that as for many
young people senseless violence has become an end in itself, there is
no need to invoke the racial issue. 03 While this, too, is unfortunately
true, it has to be repeated that the presence of coloured minorities
provides a standing invitation and determines the choice of victims.

This is not the place to go into the details of the riots of 1958, they
can be found in the columns of the serious daily papers of that
period, but attention may be drawn to the following technical aspects :
First, more than 400 people were stated to be involved in the dis-
turbances at Notting Hill, of whom twelve were detained. Nine
youths, aged between 17 and 20 and without previous convictions,
were sentenced to four years’ imprisonment each on charges of
wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm. 61 There was
general approval of these unusually heavy sentences as a necessary
deterrent and also to show the coloured minority that they were
afforded adequate protection by the courts. To a considerable extent
these objects seem to have been achieved, 65 but it is generally
realized that much more is required not only to prevent further race
riots and individual outrages 60 but also to improve the relations
between the British majority and the coloured immigrants in a more
general sense. As far as mere numbers are concerned, the Common-
wealth Immigration Act, 1962, has been successful in stemming the
influx of immigrants from over 136,000 in 1961 to over 34,000, 67
improved social services, better liaison, perhaps on the lines of
the ‘Nottingham experiment’, 68 and a radical change in housing

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

conditions and legislation and much else will be needed to soften the
present bitterness. The Nuffield Foundation has taken an important
step in allocating a research grant of £70,000 to the Institute of Race
Relations in London for a survey of all aspects of the problem, 69 but
such research notoriously takes a very long time to produce practical
results.

5. Legal Aspects of Crowd Crimes

Crimes emanating from crowd behaviour present very special practi-
cal and legal difficulties to criminal law and procedure. First, there is
the, often insuperable, difficulty of establishing who was actually in
the crowd at the critical moment and who took part in the crimes
committed, of distinguishing between the participants according to
the degree of guilt, of sorting out leaders and followers. The German
Penal Code (§ 125) makes it unnecessary to prove the actual parti-
cipation in violence of each accused ; evidence of conscious attendance
at the tumultuous gathering of a crowd where violence is committed is
sufficient for a conviction, but the penalties are of course less severe
for mere members. There is further the question of whether the
criminal law should treat the crowd factor as an aggravating or a
mitigating circumstance, and, finally, the procedural difficulties of
conducting a mass trial. 70

Mass trials are not necessarily the outcome of crimes committed by
crowds ; one of the most notorious exceptions in recent history was
the South African so-called Treason Trial, which began in December
1956 with the arrest and indictment of 156 persons who had certainly
committed no crowd crimes. 71 In the words of Dean Griswold,
‘Though a conspiracy lasting for four years is charged in the indict-
ment, not a single act of violence is alleged.’

In English law the most characteristic offence dealing with crowd
crime is the common law misdemeanour of riot which requires at
least three persons acting with a common purpose and the intent to
help one another against their opponents, if necessary by force;
moreover, there has to be force or violence displayed in such a
manner as to ‘alarm at least one person of reasonable firmness and
courage’. 72 Added to this, the famous Riot Act of 1714 makes it a
felony for an unlawful assembly of twelve or more persons not to
disperse within an hour after a justice of the peace has read, or
endeavoured to read, a proclamation calling upon them to disperse.
It was owing to a strange misinterpretation of this Act that in 1780
‘London was abandoned to pillage for three days during the dis-
turbances initiated by Lord George Gordon’ as nobody dared to fire
upon the plundering crowds because no magistrate was present to

ASSOCIATIONS IN CRIME

“read the Riot Act” \ 73 A similar common law offence is unlawful
assembly, which can be committed whenever three or more persons
meet together ‘to support each other ... in carrying out a purpose
which is likely to involve violence . . .’, even if no violence is actually
committed. Herein lies the difference to rioting, where violence must
actually occur. 74

In a recent case of a London gang fight, in which a police constable
was killed, eleven young men were charged with ‘unlawfully making
an affray’, a common law offence so unknown that there are no
references to it in modern text-books and that the Court of Criminal
Appeal had to complain about the lack of authority in older writings. 75
It is, however, an offence which does not require the participation of
more than two persons fighting each other and therefore not typical
of crowd crime.

As mentioned above, in some Penal Codes more serious penalties
are provided against leaders ; moreover, directions are given to the
courts as to whether the fact that a crime was committed by a crowd
should be regarded as a mitigating or aggravating circumstance for
the individual accused. In the Soviet ‘Principles’, for example, com-
mission of a crime ‘by an organized group’ is an aggravating factor
(§ 34, No. 2) but this does not, of course, refer to crowds. Under the
Cuban Penal Code however, similarly to the Italian Penal Code of
1930 (art. 62, No. 3), it is a mitigating factor that the offender has
acted ‘under the influence of a mass suggestion or a general riot,
unless he has provoked the latter himself or has been one of its
leaders’ (art. 37). In this connection it is also interesting that in a
Polish mass trial the court granted the request of the defence to hear
experts in sociology and psychology to explain the effect of the crowd
atmosphere on an accused charged with murder. 70

IV. ORGANIZED CRIME: ADULT AND ADOLESCENT GANGS 77
1. Adult Gangs

We can now pass on to the more or less tightly organized forms of
criminal association, the adult and adolescent gang. While much has
been written on the latter, the adult species of organized crime is one
of the subjects most conspicuously neglected in British and Conti-
nental criminology, perhaps even more than white collar crime with
which it has certain features in common. This neglect is of course
largely due to the fact that neither the gangster nor the white collar
criminal are easy types to reach and to study in the quiet atmosphere
of the prison psychologist’s or probation officer’s interviewing rooms,
for which they have but little use. Some American gangsters are said

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

to employ their private psycho-analysts from whom, however, not
much information is likely to be forthcoming. Consequently, we
know a great deal about petty recidivists and habitual prisoners,
about the various types of inadequates and other comparatively
minor nuisances who are the most frequent recipients of long sen-
tences of preventive detention, 76 but we also realize that preventive
detention, under the Criminal Justice Act, 1948, no less than under
its predecessor of 1908, has failed to catch the really dangerous
members of organized gangs of bank or train robbers, the men who
specialize in wage hold-ups, thefts of lorries in transit, etc., and more
often than not get away with it. Existing legislation and court practice
on measures of preventive detention have, however, been unable to
deal effectively with dangerous organized gang crime in other
countries, too. Joachim Hellmer, for example, who made a special
study in Germany of the files of 200 persons sentenced to the German
equivalent of preventive detention 70 admits that there is no trace in
his material of what he calls ‘the intelligent large-scale criminal’ who,
he surmises, is probably clever enough to retire from the business in
his own good time. There is no doubt a very considerable amount of
relevant information in the hands of Scotland Yard and correspond-
ing Continental organizations, but it has, apparently, not been placed
at the disposal of criminologists, not even official ones, for purposes
of research. The material now being collected in Scotland under the
direction of John A. Mack, though on a small scale, is however likely
to lead eventually to a more realistic approach to the subject. 80 While
so far only the outlines of his investigation have been published, his
tentative conclusions show a remarkable insight into this so far
badly neglected problem. His starting point is the distinction between
'habitual prisoners’ — the term used by D. J. West in his recent book 81
— i.e. those who tend to be psychologically maladjusted and spend
most of their time in prison, and ‘habitual criminals’, who are
psychologically normal, are the driving forces behind most organized
crime and are but rarely caught. ‘The Worktown study’ (Worktown
being an ‘urban territory of 100,000 people’) ‘suggests that there are
as many full-time criminals as there are full-time prisoners.’ As Mack
rightly stresses, ‘the main work of delineating the criminal sub-
culture, the system of organized criminal relationships which exists in
any big industrial region, must so far begin with such information as
emerged when the curtain is lifted by a spectacular High Court trial’
(p. 46). To the recent Scottish trials of this kind, referred to by Mack,
the English Mail Train Robbery case of 1963 should now be added
(see below).

Shortly after the last war it was maintained by the authorities and
part of the press that the rise in serious crime was largely the work of

656

ASSOCIATIONS IN CRIME

wartime deserters, whose number was estimated at 20,000 and who
had become outcasts and been forced to form gangs and live by
criminal exploits. 82 This explanation may have been correct at the
time, but for the far more serious position which has arisen in
Britain in the past five or ten years other factors have to be considered.
The present wave of large-scale, well-planned and usually highly
successful hold-ups by gangs armed with coshes or even fire-arms does
not seem to be due to the activities of desperate outcasts deprived of
ration books, which have long ceased to exist; it is more likely to be
the inevitable result of deep-seated frustration coupled with the
existence of good opportunities for easy get-away and disposal.
‘Organized crime on a commercial scale’, the chief security officer of
a firm which moves loads of tobacco worth £300,000 each night is
reported to have said. 83 According to the Report of the Commissioner
of Police of the Metropolis for 1962 the number of robberies and
assaults with intent to rob in the London area had risen from 162 in
1938 to 1,017 in 1962, of which 999 fell under s. 23 (1) of the Larceny
Act, 1916, i.e. they were offences where the person or persons in-
volved were armed with offensive weapons or instruments or were
acting in company or used violence. Unfortunately, there are no
separate figures to show the percentage of such robberies committed
‘in company’, but it is likely to be substantial. The percentage of
robberies cleared up fell from a pre-war (1934-8) average of 54 to
32-6 in 1962, which is a disastrous decline. Even the Cambridge
Institute of Criminology, sometimes inclined to take a slightly too
rosy view of developments, began to realize the seriousness of the
matter, but then long-drawn-out researches, while faithfully present-
ing the statistical picture, have so far failed to produce the all-
important details on the men and the organizations behind these
crimes. Moreover, in their Robbery in London M they still maintain
that ‘while all those changes are consistent with a tendency for
robbery to become more organized, too much emphasis should not be
placed on this’ (!). The puzzled reader will ask himself in vain for the
reasoning behind this astonishing statement or the subsequent one
that ‘it is probably still true that this type of organized crime is
relatively infrequent’. It all depends on the meaning of relativity.

The activities of these gangs culminated in the great rail robbery
near Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire, on the 8th August 1963, where the
robbers got away with more than two and a half million pounds in
banknotes of which only about one-tenth was recovered by the police.

Interesting and in many ways valuable as the extensive press reports of the
main trial held in Aylesbury in April 1964 were, they could of course give
only a minimum amount of information on the structure of the elaborate
organization and thepsychological make-up of the individualcriminals who

ccu-a 657

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

had built it up (see The Times, 17.4.1964). Twelve men were found guilty
on the 16th April, of whom seven received sentences of thirty years’
imprisonment each, sentences of a length imposed only in very exceptional
cases by British courts. Two more of the men received 25 years each, one
24, another 20, and a third (on a less serious charge) 3 years. With two
exceptions, they gave notice of appeal against conviction. In addition, a
few men received minor sentences for receiving. In spite of the length and,
we have to assume, thoroughness of the preliminary proceedings and the
trial itself, the presiding judge, Mr. Justice Edmund Davies, had to admit
at the end that the scanty nature of the evidence in this direction made it
impossible for him to determine exactly what part had been played by each
of the 11 convicted of the larger conspiracy or the eight convicted of the
actual robbery; therefore, he proposed to treat them all, with two excep-
tions, in the same way (The Times, 16.4.1964). In view of this confession of,
at least partial, failure on the part of the presiding judge to penetrate
beneath the surface — a failure for which, of course, under the accusatorial
system of an English criminal trial he was in no way to blame — it is
hardly possible for the outside observer to gain a picture of the real inside
story of the plot and its execution. One might perhaps venture to guess that
at least five categories of people were here involved: first, the planners,
those whom Mays calls the ‘Top Villains’ (p. 177); secondly, those who
carried out the actual robbery; thirdly, the receivers who had to distribute
and hide the stolen money, which owing to its sheet bulk was no easy task;
fourthly, those who bought and equipped the near-by farm where much of
the preparatory work was done and some of the loot hidden away; and,
lastly, the hangers-on required for a multitude of minor jobs. According
to the police, no real ‘master-mind’ was behind the plot, but whether or not
this is correct will as usual depend on the definition of this term. The judge
seemed to have a different view. In any case, the fact that even now only a
small fraction of the loot has been discovered seems to show that in some
ways at least this crime did pay, and it remains uncertain whether the men
who received the heaviest sentences were actually the principal organizers
of the plot or whether the latter may not have remained unknown and will,
after a suitable interval, enjoy the profits and proceed to other, equally
daring, exploits. However, according to the testimony of the presiding
judge, even some of those actually sentenced were men of considerable
ability. The lists of previous convictions showed remarkable differences,
some of them being fairly long and serious, others negligible. One of them
had received 12 strokes of the birch for robbery with violence. Their
occupations, too, showed a great variety. Most of them lived in or near
London. Their ages were mostly in the 30 to 40 range, but a few were
between 40 and 50 and a few slightly below 30; none of them were under 25.

One of the lessons to be learnt even from the incomplete informa-
tion so far available is that there was co-operation between fairly
mixed strata of society, ranging from bookmakers, racing motorists,
carpenters, to solicitors and their clerks, and including strongly
active anti-social elements with heavy previous convictions as well as

658

ASSOCIATIONS IN CRIME

passively asocial elements who had before managed to remain,
however uneasily, within the sphere of outward respectability. Modern
large-scale crime needs a careful mixture of people of different talents
and inclinations. The factors explaining the unusual severity of the
sentences were obviously the exceptionally large amount stolen, the
heavy coshing of the engine driver, whom the judge described as
‘nerve-shattered’, the refusal of the accused to give any helpful in-
formation, and what was described by the press as their lack of
‘emotion’ or repentance — as if anything of the kind could be ex-
pected from the principal figures in this trial.

The sensational success of this crime should, however, not detract
our attention from the more modest ones reported almost daily in
monotonous succession. On the 23rd February 1963 The Times com-
mented on the yield of one single week: a £30,000 raid on wages
from a Gas Board office, an attack on the Irish Mail train, the capture
of a £43,000 load of cigarettes from a British Road Services lorry.
The value of the property obtained by robbery in the London area in

1962 was £799,117, of which only £70,202 (8-8 percent) was recovered
( Metropolitan Police Report for 1962, p. 55). There were 40 wage
robberies in London in the 16 weeks August-November 1962 ( Sunday
Times, 2.12.1962), and according to The Times of the 19th March

1963 a very active gang of safe-breakers was operating in the
Chelmsford area of Essex with large quantities of explosives. In a
B.B.C. television ‘Panorama’ programme (18.3.1963) the annual
losses inflicted by organized ‘hi-jackers’ were estimated at £6 million.

Organized crime is not necessarily concerned with robbery and
similar forms of violence; there are many other profitable outlets for
its enterprise. As recent trials have shown, the doping of race-
horses or dogs is one of them. At Sussex Assizes, six men and one
woman were found guilty on the 30th October 1963 of conspiring to
defraud, at various places in England between April 1957 and May
1963, the owners and trainers of racehorses, bookmakers and others by
means of the administration of drugs to racehorses in order to affect
their performances. One of the men was regarded as the brains behind
the plot and as having corrupted a very large number of people. 85

Looking at the history of this phenomenon we find gangs of adult
criminals active particularly at times of political and social upheavals,
such as the robber-knights ( Raubritter ) of the German Middle Ages
with their counterparts, the Vitalienbriider and many other gangs of
pirates, professional beggars, and vagrants. 80 The seventeenth century
saw the growth of gangs of coiners ( Kipper and Wipper ); in the
eighteenth century the secret societies flourished as centres of large-
scale frauds, and gangs of robbers terrorized the population of
Germany and other Continental countries. 87

659

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

For France, it has been pointed out by Vouin and Leaute 88 that
adult gangs flourished there at the time of the great revolution, but
disappeared slowly in the course of the nineteenth century which was
‘as individualistic in this respect as in so many others’. It was also
thanks to certain drastic provisions of French criminal law that
banditism has practically ceased to exist in France since 1953, in
which connection those authors mention the establishment of a
special service charged with the repression of banditry in the Direction
generate de la Surete nationale and an Act of the 23rd November 1950
which imposes the death penalty not only for armed robbery but also
for theft without the use of arms if one of the participants kept a
weapon in the car used for the commission of the crime.

■ For England, some material on gangs can be found in the histories
of criminal law by Pike and Radzinowicz, and particularly in Fuller’s
The Beggars' Brotherhood. The case of Jonathan Wild, the subject of
Henry Fielding’s famous novel, is interesting for the light it sheds not
only on matters of eighteenth-century criminal law and procedure,
but also on the activities of London gangs of thieves and robbers.
Fuller reports that, according to Defoe, Wild at one time controlled
an organization of more than seven thousand thieves, which if this
was true meant that it could not have been a gang in our sense of the
word. However, he divided his men into districts, which made them
easier to control. 89 With his execution the Brotherhood came to an
end (pp. 234-8). Fuller has some interesting details on the earlier his-
tory of the medieval gangs of tramps; the first occasion on which
the beggars formed anything like an organized association with
a common purpose was, he thinks, the peasants’ rising of 1481 in
Kent connected with the name of Wat Tyler, 90 but this was a political
and socio-economic movement rather than a criminal organization.
Medieval tramps were isolated and never formed gangs, but in' the
middle of the fifteenth century there were already bands of outlaws
attacking and robbing travellers (Fuller, pp. 20-36).

The classic countries of present-day organized crime are the U.S.A.
and Italy, and it is widely believed that it has been imported to the
U.S.A. from Sicily through immigrant members of the Mafia. 81 The
Kefauver Committee presented some evidence of this connection,
but other American writers such as Bell as well as the Italian
authorities declare it to be unconvincing. 82 The wisest course for us
would be to leave the question ‘wide open’. What cannot be doubted
is that many members of the Mafia actually emigrated to the U.S.A.
from the eighteen eighties on; that many notorious American gang-
sters have been of Sicilian origin, and that certain criminal techniques
characteristic of Mafia methods are now, mutatis mutandis , con-
spicuously present in American crime. To understand these char-

associations in crime

acteristics we should not exclusively rely on the views of American
criminologists, but supplement them by the more first-hand accounts
of such experts as the distinguished Anglo-Sicilian author Francis M.
Guercio with his experience of nearly twenty years spent in Sicily.® 3
According to him, the Mafia is not a secret society, but rather ‘a
habit of tackling all enterprises, great or small, in an indirect and
underhand manner, by mediation, by recommendation, and other
dubious forms of “influence”’ (p. 65). While providing redress
against evil-doers, it also protects criminals against the law and
encourages their crimes. Its origins lie in the resistance of Sicilians
against oppression and corruption right from the days of the Sicilian
Vesper of 1282, but the organization itself seems to date from the
time of the widely hated Bourbonic regime which was brought to an
end by Garibaldi in 1860. Glimpses of this atmosphere can be
caught from Guiseppe di Lampedusa’s famous novel The Leopard.
Guercio distinguishes two forms of Mafia, the lower, concerned with
large-scale crimes against property, with blackmail, kidnapping, and
murder as weapons to obtain its objects, and the higher, controlling
politics, law, relations between landlords and tenants, with the aristo-
crats of the Mafia frequently being prominent pillars of society. All
this resembles the position in some parts of the United States, with
the difference that there the power of gangsterdom was built on
bootlegging, drug traffic and gambling, whereas in Sicily its founda-
tion was control of the land (p. 66). Guercio also shows that the
Mafia was in fact able to safeguard the interests of the common
people more effectively than the government, which latter, it has to
be remembered, has often been regarded by Sicilians as a foreign
body. 94 The First World War led to a clash between the older and
the younger generation of mafiosi, on account of their different
experiences during the war, followed by a temporary decline of
their power. Interest in football replaced the attraction of the Mafia,
but the demoralization of the Second World War with its economic
and social chaos after the breakdown of Fascist rule led to its revival
(pp. 78-83). According to Danilo Dolci, whose campaign for social
reform in Western Sicily is one of the most promising features of the
present situation, the Mafia have tailed 39 trade union leaders and
nearly 600 other persons in that area. 95 The effect of the recently
organized large-scale police war against, the Mafia remains to be
seen. 96

Even from this greatly condensed account the similarities and dis-
similarities between the Sicilian and the American scene will become
fairly clear. The latter, with its vastly larger, diversified, and intensely
industrialized economy, offers a correspondingly greater variety of
opportunities for organized gang activities. Moreover, the presence

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

of many different races of immigrants, each with its own peculiar
history of oppression and rebellion in their homelands— Hans v.
Hentig 97 stresses the predominance of Irish, Italian, and Jewish
immigrants in American gangsterdom— adds an element of racial
rivalry to the existing competition between gangs, which is absent in
the more homogeneous homeland of the Mafia. In fact, publications
such as the Kefauver Report show an abundance of names belonging
to those three national groups, but on the other hand Edgar Hoover
claims that his files contain the best American names and only
occasionally a foreign-sounding one. 98

Equally conspicuous, however, are the parallels between the Mafia
and its American counterpart. There is in particular that peculiar
interplay of underworld big business and politics that strikes the
observer. What American writers such as Merton, Daniel Bell, and
William F. Whyte have told us about the services which the political
machine, the racket, performs in the, real or alleged, interest of
ordinary people is, though on a far greater scale, clearly reminiscent
of Mafia techniques. 99 Nevertheless, we have to bear in mind that
very similar techniques have also been developed in other parts of the
globe, for example by the Chinese secret societies, the ‘black society’
which has ‘always to be placated’ by the ordinary business man and
householder. 100 The practice of extracting ‘protection money’ from
business people, one of the most familiar forms of racketeering, is
even said to go back to the pre-Indian days of Lord Clive of India in
the middle of the eighteenth century. 101 Even the notorious institution
of ‘Omerta’, unconditional solidarity, loyalty, and conspiracy of
silence (Guercio, p. 67), is not confined to the Mafia, but a charac-
teristic of many criminal organizations. And with regard to the
conspicuous role played by Italians in the American underworld,
Bell has pleaded in their favour that, being the last on the scene, they
found themselves at a considerable disadvantage against the Irish and
Jews and had to use any means open to them to make up for this.
With regard to the alleged Mafia influence, it has been suggested by
Earl Johnson, the author of one of the most up-to-date and detailed
studies of American organized crime, that this belief may be due to
the fact that the traffic in narcotics, one of the most profitable
activities of the gangs, requires close connections with Mediterranean
and Far Eastern countries, for which Sicilians are particularly well
located. 102

In a recent book byNorman Lewis 103 some interesting information
is given on the collaboration between U.S. officials in Sicily and the
Mafia at the time of the invasion towards the end of the last world
war, collaboration which, he thinks, has greatly strengthened the
weakening power of the Mafia in its homeland. Moreover, the

662

ASSOCIATIONS IN CRIME

Sicilian psychiatrist Carmelo Nobile has drawn attention to the need
to destroy not merely the Mafia as a criminal organization but also
the ‘spirit’, the whole ‘mentality and customs uniting its active
members with their protectors and their victims’. 104

So far, no definition of the term ‘organized crime’ has been given,
but it is clear that many different variants of it have to be distin-
guished. Johnson defines it as ‘a group of considerable size which
engages in continuous criminal activity over a long, usually in-
definite, period of time’ and he regards this element of long duration
as the most essential one. 105 While this may be true of some of the
very large and elaborate organizations established in the U.S.A. it
hardly applies to the smaller organizations found elsewhere which
may be formed for the commission of a few criminal exploits only and
dissolve themselves afterwards. Among the other characteristics
often mentioned are also some which seem to be peculiar to American
conditions rather than to other countries. This is the case especially
with the political domination of law-enforcement agencies by
criminal organizations as we know it from many American studies. 106
While corrupt political contacts with police, lawyers, and even
judges do exist elsewhere they are usually less close and on a smaller
scale. On the other hand, it cannot be denied that in the long run
organized crime can usually flourish only with the ‘active and con-
scious co-operation of a number of elements of respectable society’. 107
It is not much different here from the position existing with regard to
white collar crime, although the support given to the latter will be
more open, unashamed, and unfettered by considerations of social
propriety since there is not the same social distance between white
collar criminals and their supporters as does often, though by no
means always, exist between organized crime and its bourgeois
supporters.

The more we study the very extensive, brutally frank and compe-
tent American literature on the subject, culminating for the time
being in the symposium on ‘Combating Organized Crime’ published
by the Armais of the. American Academy of Political and Social
Science (vol. 347, May 1963), the clearer will it become that in the
U.S.A. the term ‘organized crime’ means in fact something far more
specific than it does elsewhere and that in general definitions such as
that of Johnson this specific element, though implied, is perhaps not
brought out with sufficient clarity: it is the fact that in the U.S.A. the
term is no longer primarily aimed at such comparatively small affairs
as bank or train robberies, even if they should occasionally yield
hauls of a few million pounds (or dollars as in the 1950 Boston case.
Annals, p. 44), Its essence lies not in such passing exploits but rather
m its country-wide operations in the fields of gambling, prostitution,

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

drag traffic, liquor trade, protection rackets, and so on, where the
profits are vastly greater and, what is more, can be relied upon as
being fairly regular. To make the operation of these country-wide
concerns possible they have to be organized in the same workmanlike
manner as legal enterprises of corresponding size, in the words of
Sellin (. Annals , p. 12) ‘they must have capital, physical plant, man-
agerial personnel, and employees of various kinds’. And they need the
political machine to support them. Looked at in this way, the
Buckinghamshire train robbery was small and amateurish although
the beginnings of something more professional can already be dis-
covered, as for example the ‘physical plant’. Its main weakness was,
however, that seen in the light of American achievements this whole
type of crime is hopelessly out of date.

With regard to the membership of criminal organizations, it may
consist of very different categories, not all of them necessarily pro-
fessionals of a high order. As pointed out above in connection with
the great train robbery case there is need for the co-operation of
people of higher and lower status in the criminal hierarchy. More-
over, habitual offenders are not necessarily members of an organ-
ization; there are also lone wolves among them, and, though to a
much lesser extent, this applies to professional criminals, too. Reck-
less is also inclined to differentiate the degree of organization accord-
ing to the various main types of criminal activity. 108

Turning now once more to the present position in Britain and its
more recent history, since the days of Jonathan Wild, we are im-
mediately reminded of the white slave traffic, closely associated with
the drug traffic — the existence of which is established not least firmly
by the frequency with which it has been publicly denied — and also of
the race-dopers — already mentioned before — and the race-course
gangs. 109 With regard to the latter, it has been claimed that in the
course of this century the racecourse had been ‘purged of gangster-
dom’ and ‘terrorization and blackmail . . . had been effectively
crashed’ by the formation of ‘Bookmakers’ Protection Associa-
tions’. 110 Nevertheless, certain trials at the Old Bailey followed by
questions in the House of Commons make it appear doubtful, to say
the least, whether such gangs and gang warfare have been extin-
guished in London. Mr. Justice Donovan, sentencing two men to
seven years’ imprisonment each, is reported to have said in his sum-
ming up that ‘the facts of this case sounded more like Chicago and
the worst days of prohibition than London in 1956’, 111 and in the
House of Commons Mr. Peter Rawlinson, subsequently Solicitor-
General in the Macmillan and Home Governments, stated: ‘There
certainly appeared to be gangs . . ; and there certainly were protec-
tion rackets in existence in Soho where wretched shopkeepers for fear

664

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

years but the trend is in the opposite direction. From Thrasher’s book
the following basic elements of adolescent gang formation emerged : 117
it was chiefly a phenomenon arising from the specific needs of under-
privileged youths living in ‘interstitial’ areas of big cities, of spon-
taneous, unplanned origin, ‘the natural outgrowth of a crowd of
boys meeting on a street corner’, slowly developing a common
awareness and tradition, attached to a certain territory, and soon
meeting some hostile elements, in particular rival gangs, which leads
to conflict and through it to closer integration, solidarity, and loyalty
to its chosen leaders. In their characteristics and their needs— which
are basically identical with those four wishes of W. I. Thomas
(Chapter 16)— the gang members are not much different from other
boys, neither more nor less emotionally unstable, victims of an un-
satisfactory environment, simply trying, in Thrasher’s words, ‘to
create a society for themselves where none adequate to their needs
exists’. While many of their activities are not, or not seriously, delin-
quent, they are often driven towards anti-social behaviour through
lack of response on the part of the community and conflict with
neighbouring gangs. In the words of Bordua, ‘Thrasher describes an
age of innocence indeed’, although even from his description certain
elements of less innocent malice and fundamentally anti-social trends
already seem to emerge. These latter occupy the centre of the picture
in Cohen’s and Cloward-Ohlin’s writings of more than a quarter of a
century after Thrasher with their emphasis on the status problems of
gang members (Chapter 22 above).

The most recent stage in this development is represented by Lewis
Yablonsky’s The Violent Gang, which, like Thrasher’s book is based
on the author’s first-hand acquaintance with delinquent gangs,
though not in Chicago but in New York, This is so far the most up-
to-date analysis of the problem, and its findings are far from ‘inno-
cent’ or reassuring. Apart from the bad taste it leaves in the mouth of
the reader it shatters some of the traditional concepts of the American
adolescent gang, being highly critical of the picture presented by
Thrasher as well as by his successors. There is in fact very little left of
the more positive, constructive, redeeming aspects of gang life as seen
by Thrasher, and their place is taken by a senseless resort to brutal
violence, brutality for its own sake or in order to prove to themselves,
‘as a kind of existential validation’, that they are alive (p. 8). Thrasher’s
emphasis on the need for a territory of its own is still true (p. 31),
but there is no organization left worth speaking of, no element of
friendship and loyalty towards a leader. Thrasher, too, had stressed
the potentially close affinities between a gang and a mob, but
Yablonsky’s gangs are hardly more than an unorganized mob, and
most of their own talk about size, leaders, and organization turned

ASSOCIATIONS IN CRIME

out to be nothing but empty bragging. Likewise, Cloward’s and
Ohlin’s threefold classification and their description of the ‘criminal’
gang as an apprenticeship for a subsequent stable career in adult
crime, which might have been true for the Chicago gangs of the
twenties and thirties, no longer apply to the ‘disorganized slum’ of
present-day gangland (p. 147). Even so, from Yablonsky’s own
classification it appears that there are two types, which he calls the
‘socially-dominated’ and the ‘delinquency-dominated’ gangs, that
have still much in common with the ones described by previous
writers. It is only the third type, the ‘violence-dominated’ gang,
which presents a more radical break with the past. Altogether, it
would seem to be likely that the contrasts discovered by Yablonsky
are more of degree than of kind and perhaps also more due to the
different racial composition of the gangs described by him, and to
their special environmental stresses, some of which may have been
only temporary. It was not race as such: as he stresses, the extra-
ordinarily high delinquency rate of the Puerto Rican youths in New
York appeared to be the result of their move from stable to dis-
organized slums, from a poor community to a ‘non-community’ (p.
173), from rural areas to a metropolis.

In a recent paper another American sociologist, Nathan L. Ger-
rard, 118 deals especially with what he calls the ‘core member’ of the
gang. By this he means neither the average member nor the leader but
rather the ‘totally committed’ member, whose personality is marked
by ‘response-insecurity’, i.e. a ‘generalized feeling that others are
hostile or indifferent to one’s welfare’, coupled with inferiority feel-
ings (weak self-esteem) and the resulting conviction that ‘interests and
self-esteem can be realized only through acts of aggression’. Such core
members are, according to Gerrard, likely to pursue adult criminal
careers long after their former partners have abandoned their delin-
quent ways in favour of conventional occupational and family roles.

As compared with the Work done in the U.S.A. Britain lags
greatly behind in research on adolescent gangs. This has been largely
due to lack of financial resources and, closely connected with it,
of well-trained workers who are suitable for this particular kind
of work and willing to face the risks which it may involve. One
of the few small-scale attempts to tackle it, undertaken in 1951-2
in the notorious Hoxton district of London, has been briefly described
by M. L. Turner and John C. Spencer in Spontaneous Youth Groups
(Note 77 above). It was a sequel to the better known ‘Barge Club’
experiment, also described by Turner and Spencer. 119 Its first stages
of locating one of the gangs and making contact with it occupied the
field worker for more than a year, after which the project had to be
abandoned because of lack of further funds. ‘The problems it had set

667

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

out to answer were still unsolved’, but it had at least become clear
that delinquent gangs, whose very existence had often been denied by
the authorities, were in fact active, making themselves a considerable
nuisance to people living in the district. Even so, it is the prevailing
view that adolescent gangs in this country, as compared with the
U.S.A., are much rarer, less purposeful and dangerous. 120 In one of
the most careful and detailed discussions of the subject the London
psychiatrist Peter Scott divides his material, derived from juvenile
courts, remand homes, psychiatric clinics, a residential school and a
boys’ club, into three categories: adolescent street groups, structured
gangs, and loosely structured (diffuse) groups, the latter again falling
under three sub-headings: the fleeting, casual groups; the groups of
customary friends and siblings; the loose anti-social groups. Of the
total sample of 151 associations, 17 were proper gangs and 43 loose
anti-social groups; the other types are of no direct interest in the
present connection. Scott, commenting on the small number of
proper gangs in his sample, rules out the possible explanation that
they may be too clever or well-organized to get caught, or, if
caught, tlieir loyalty may prevent them from disclosing information.
Considering the difficulties, encountered in the previously mentioned
Turner-Spencer study, of establishing contact with adolescent crimi-
nal gangs, it may seem doubtful whether in Scott’s sample the proper
gangs are in fact not greatly under-represented ; it is a long way— not
easily and willingly undertaken— from Hoxton to the juvenile court
and the psychiatric clinic. Even so, it is interesting to note that the
human material in Scott’s collection did in his view not conform to
the ‘picture of healthy devilment, adventurousness, pride of leader-
ship or loyal lieutenancy that is often painted’. His gang-members
usually showed ‘gross anti-social character defect’ and came from
homes with a disturbed and detrimental atmosphere.

One final remark may not be out of place to illustrate the progress
made in the post-war period with regard to the definition of a ‘gang’.
While in 1949 the present author could still complain 121 that to many
writers * “gang” means “gang”, although it may be nothing but a
chance encounter, a casual collaboration in the commission of one
isolated offence’, there is now very little danger of this confusion
happening again. Most present-day investigators arc careful to make
clear what their statistical figures of ‘gang’ crime arc intended to
cover. 122 There would be little point in reciting the percentages of
gang delinquency found by different investigators, as their compara-
bility may be questionable. It is perhaps more important to refer to
the attempts to discover psychological and social differences between
those who offend in company with others and those who offend
alone. It has been suggested that the latter are more likely to be

668

ASSOCIATIONS IN CRIME

individuals of a more complicated psychological make-up and less
amenable to treatment, especially in institutions. The Gluecks, for
example, found a higher percentage of institutional success for those
juveniles who had committed their offences in company, which, they
suggest, may show that ‘lone wolves’ are less influenced by others and
less adaptable to group life in institutions. 123 However, we have to
bear in mind the great variety of types among gang members and also
among lone offenders, which makes any clear-cut distinctions of this
kind hazardous. Peter Scott discovered no striking contrasts between
the groups. On the other hand, the treatment may have to be on very
different lines for lone offenders and for gang members, since the very
fact of such membership produces additional problems not present
in other cases. The age-old questions arise of ‘breaking up’ the whole
gang, removing the worst elements, treating individual members, or
trying to transform the whole gang into a constructive, no longer
anti-social, unit, but this cannot here be dealt with. Most of the
publications quoted in Note 77 provide valuable material on the
matter. It will be clear, moreover, that the phenomenon of the gang,
at least where it possesses some permanence and organization, poses
questions of treatment fundamentally different from those arising in
cases of crowd hooliganism, where no permanent unit exists as a
potential object of treatment. There are, however, certain well-known,
more or less permanent, social constellations particularly likely to
create outbreaks of hooliganism, such as football matches which
attract very large crowds of supporters of each of the teams, with
intense hostility between them, going back occasionally over periods
of half a century. 121 Here at least measures of preventive treat-
ment such as licensing football grounds, limiting the numbers of
spectators, coupled with heavy penalties after the event, have to take
the place of the more individual and constructive steps needed for
gangs.

After this had been written, a great deal of public anxiety was
caused in spring 1964, by the outrageous conduct of adolescent
gangs who had flocked in large numbers to popular seaside resorts
such as Clacton-on-Sea in Essex, Brighton in Sussex, and Margate in
Kent, all of them situated within a range of 50 to 70 miles from
London. Fairly large-scale battles were fought between the ‘Mods’
and the ‘Rockers’ in the streets and on the beaches, and damage was
done to public and private property, accompanied by assaults on the
police. In the discussions, a great variety of factors were held respon-
sible,^ ranging from boredom, lack of constructive leisure-time
activities and of reasonable prospects of promotion open to these
adolescents, to the popular ‘just for a laugh’ (see the daily papers for
April 1964, and the Sunday papers for the 5.4.1964). A sociologist,

669

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

David Downes, who had just completed a two years’ study of
adolescent delinquency in the East End of London (see above,
Chapter 22, Note 38), is inclined to interpret the matter in accordance
with Merton’s theory (Chapter 22, s. 1), stressing at the same time that
the situation in Britain was far less dangerous than in the U.S.A.
He adds, however, that it might well become explosive in the future.
0 Observer , 5.4.1964.) How far these ‘gangs’ were real gangs or rather
a mixture of gangs and crowd is difficult to decide from the material
available. One characteristic feature was the importance of the
contributions to the disturbances made by the girls by encouraging
the boys to violence and rowdyism. Another regrettable feature was
the exaggerated publicity given to the offenders by television and some
sections of the press. The penalties imposed included some short
prison sentences and heavy fines.

V. VICTIMOLOGY 125

To include in a chapter on ‘Associations in Crime’ a section on the
relationships between the criminal and his victim may seem to be a
far-fetched interpretation of the subject. And indeed, so far we have
been dealing only with associations consisting of criminals, although
the degree of their participation may have differed greatly. There can,
however, be a strong element of association in the criminal-victim
relationship, with the two parties — so it seems at least — not working
together, but in opposite directions. Actually, as will be shown below,
this working in opposite directions may apply only to some part of
the way, while the other, perhaps far longer, stretch shows col-
laboration.

The importance of the role of the victim has occasionally been
acknowledged even by the criminal law in various provisions, although
its general trend has been different. It is the modern view that the
reaction to crime on the part of the state should not be solely deter-
mined by the interests and needs of the victim and his desire for
vengeance. From this it does not follow that the role of the victim
should be altogether ignored by the law. In fact, provocation on the
part of the victim has been treated, for many centuries, as a mitigating
factor in English law 126 as in other legal systems (e.g. § 213 of the Ger-
man Penal Code), in particular in cases of homicide, but occasionally
also in a more general way (e.g. Swiss Penal Code, art. 64, Cuban
Penal Code, art. 38, where, moreover, the ‘obvious abuse of authority’
on the part of the victim is mentioned as a mitigating circumstance).
The consent of the victim may also act as a mitigating factor in cases
of homicide (e.g. §216, German Penal Code), but the widespread

670

ASSOCIATIONS IN CRIME

demands for the legalization of acts of euthanasia have not yet been
successful. 127 In cases of wounding the legal effect of the victim’s con-
sent is one of the most difficult and controversial questions of the
criminal law; it has been very widely discussed in particular with
reference to injuries received in boxing and other sports, through
surgical operations, sterilization, castration, and artificial insemina-
tion. It depends on the seriousness of the consent, on the victim’s
mental and legal capacity to give a valid consent, on the object of the
act to which he consents, and other factors, whether the consent has
any legal force, and it fails to have such force if there are public
grounds against its recognition 128 . In the case of false pretences, the
folly and credulity of the victim of fraud have been used by the law in
former centuries as a welcome excuse for doing nothing to protect
him against swindlers. 128 These few examples may show that the law
has treated the problem in casual and not always reasonable ways.
Criminology was not much more successful until the study of the
matter was taken up after the First World War and, more system-
atically, after the Second World War as part of the more socio-
psychologically oriented approach to crime. Slowly it was realized
that as crime always requires an object, personal or impersonal, the
role played by this object, be it active or passive, should be submitted
to closer examination as an essential part of our efforts to understand
the criminal and the manner in which he should be treated. The poet
Franz Werfel expressed these ideas very pointedly in his novel ‘Not
the murderer, the victim is guilty’ (Nicht der Morder, der Ermordete
ist schuldig, 1920), and shortly afterwards Shostakovitch’s opera
Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk tried to show the heroine, Katerina
Ismailova, as a murderess deserving more our sympathy than our
condemnation. The psychologist Henri Ellenberger, in a fine essay
on the psychological relationships between the two parties, drew atten-
tion to the pantheistic metaphysics of Brahman philosophy and to
Schopenhauer’s identification of the hater and the hated. The latter’s
moral philosophy of compassion was particularly congenial to such
attempts to bridge the gulf between the two parties. In our time, the
work of the late Belgian psychiatrist and criminologist Etienne de
Greeff had already — in the words of Professor Paul Cornil — ‘been
imbued with the importance and complexity of the criminal-victim
relationship, especially in crimes of passion’.

The first criminologist who tried to produce a comprehensive
analysis of the subject was v. Hentig in his famous monograph The
Criminal and his Victim, which he followed up by several contribu-
tions in German on the role of the victim in such types of crime as
murder, false pretences, blackmail. In the meantime, a pioneering
study was made by the Langley Porter Clinic in San Francisco on a

671

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

limited, but particularly intricate aspect, the different types of child
victims of sexual offences.

The manifold interest thus shown in the role of the victim en-
couraged an Israeli lawyer, B. Mendelsohn, to put forward a very
ambitious scheme for the foundation of a new and independent scien-
tific discipline, victimology, with its own institutes, cliniques, inter-
national society, congress, and chair. As already mentioned (Chapter
1), there is no reason, however, why the study of the victim should not
be left to criminology which, after all, includes not only the study
of the criminal, but also that of crime in all its aspects. It is the
fundamental error of the victimology-enthusiasts that they arbitrarily
confine criminology to the study of the criminal. The position of
criminology is still precarious enough and should not be rendered
unnecessarily more perilous by making exaggerated claims on behalf
of a potential sister discipline which would deprive it of some of its
own territory. Criminology would be incomplete without the proper
study of the victim. Moreover, although it has often been done in an
unsystematic manner, criminological research has already achieved
much to clarify the role of the victim. This is also the view held by
Professor Paul Cornil in his valuable contribution.

In addition to the material collected on the role of the victim in
specific categories of offences, certain general points have so far
emerged in the literature. It may be useful to mention the following:

(a) The distinction between criminal and victim, which in former
days appeared as clear-cut as that of black and white, actually often
becomes vague and blurred in individual cases. The longer and the
more deeply the actions of the persons involved are scrutinized, the
more doubtful will it occasionally be who is to blame for the tragic
outcome. 130 This is especially so in certain cases of homicide, where
attention was already drawn before (Chapter 16) to the intricate
nature of the relationships between the ‘penal couple’, to use a term
coined by Mendelsohn. He distinguishes five types of victims accord-
ing to their degree of guilt, ranging from the completely innocent to
the ‘victim due to ignorance’, the equally guilty, the one who is more
guilty than the offender, either as deliberate provocateur or through
lack of self-control, and finally to the ‘only guilty’ victim, where the
accused is acquitted as having acted in legitimate self-defence. Some-
times it is a matter of mere chance who becomes the criminal and who
the victim. As Pinatel points out, the two roles may be exchanged
either successively or simultaneously, i.e. one of the parties may be
first the criminal and afterwards the victim, as in the case of a swindler
who is killed by his angry victim, or of two swindlers who cheat each
other at the same game. Vittorio de Sica’s film Bicycle Thieves shows
in a very simple and human fashion how an ordinary theft of a

672

ASSOCIATIONS IN CRIME

bicycle can plunge its victim into utter despair and lead him to crime.
It is a fairly common attitude that the victim of such an offence is
entitled to help himself to another bicycle.

(b) There are certain individuals who, either because of their per-
sonal characteristics or as members of certain occupations, can be
described as ‘latent victims’, i.e. they are more prone than others to
become the objects of crimes. This corresponds to the categoric risks
to commit crime 131 or to be involved in traffic accidents. Obvious ex-
amples of such victim proneness are comparatively defenceless per-
sons such as the young, the old, females, the drunks (Clifford Shaw’s
The Jack-Roller), the feeble-minded, the illiterate, the members of
minority groups. Among members of victim-prone occupations are
taxi-drivers, prostitutes, and all persons who have to handle large
sums of money. 133 In London, for example, the naked bodies of four
prostitutes were found in the same area between November 1963 and
April 1964 (for the details see the Sunday Times, 26.4.1964); and in a
recent study of the Chicago Skid Row district Donald J. Bogue (see
above, Note 82 to Chapter 23) reports that criminals frequent such
districts in order to rob the residents who are defenceless on account
of age, infirmity, or drink. All this is common-sense experience, and
no new discipline is needed to fill in the details. There are, however,
also more complex psychological possibilities, as in the case of maso-
chists who deliberately provoke physical or spiritual aggression to
satisfy their own wishes. Moreover, there are those victims who are
tired of life and provide the killer with every opportunity. According
to Sueton and Plutarch, Julius Caesar belonged to this category. 133
v. Hentig has produced a comprehensive psychological typology of
victims. 131

(c) The victim is not necessarily an individual, it may also be a
l collective entity, a firm or a whole race or nation. The provisions of

the substantive criminal law will usually indicate whom they are
intended to protect. For example in cases of genocide victims are not
• only those individual members of the national, racial, or religious
groups whose destruction had been the object of the crime, but also
the groups as such. 135

The details of the victim-offender relationship have been studied in
s particular for those types of crime where personal factors are most

i 1 J'kely to play an important part, i.e. homicide and sex offences, but

j j to some extent also for offences of an economic character. While the

: Report of the Royal Commission on Capital Punishment of 1953 pre-

: seated nothing but a few statistical tables to show the bare outlines

i • of the victim-murderer relationship (Appendix 3, Tables 4 and 5,

s similarly Criminal Statistics for 1962 , p. xxxiv), Wolfgang in his

j : Philadelphia study produced an all-round picture not only of offenders

; cc «-s 673

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

and victims as separate units but also with special emphasis on the
frequency of primary group relationships existing between the two
parties. To mention only one aspect of his study, in accordance with
Durkheim’s thesis that males participate more than females in collec-
tive life, he found primary group relationships far more frequent in
the case of female than of male victims, i.e. women were more often
than men the victims of men standing very close to them (p. 204).
Attention was also paid to the frequency of victim-precipitated homi-
cides, which term Wolfgang defined as cases where the victim was
‘the first to commence the interplay of resort to physical violence’
(p. 252). One could, of course, also use the term in a far wider sense
as including the cases where the victim precipitated the crime in other
ways. In view of his narrower use of the term it is not surprising that
Wolfgang found an extraordinarily high rate of precipitating victims
with police records; in fact, a significantly higher proportion of them
had such records than had the offenders (p. 262).

Homosexuals are occasionally killed by their partners, whereby
their indecent approaches are used as a pretext for violence, some-
times coupled with robbery. 138 Such cases are illustrations of what
Sykes and Matza have called ‘denial of the victim’. 137

In the study of sexual crimes against children the distinction be-
tween participating and accidental victims has become generally
accepted. The work of the Langley Porter Clinic has produced ample
evidence for the existence of these two categories. Participant victims,
as compared with the others, were found usually to be girls who had
known the offender for some time, had had more than one sexual
experience with him, had received some form of remuneration from
him and kept the relationship secret from their parents. All of them
showed considerable emotional disturbance and various other per-
sonality traits which distinguished them from the accidental victims,
such as much stronger needs for security and love; a number of them
were severely neurotic, felt rejected by their parents and had con-
siderable anxiety about sex. In many cases, their parents too had
sexual conflicts and marital difficulties. A sub-group of them had
been molested by their stepfathers. The offenders also were examined
and were found not to fit ‘the popular stereotype of the sex maniac’,
but to be rather immature and incapable of developing satisfactory
relationships with adults.

In a more recent British study, Gibbens and Prince 138 also stress
the importance of the role played by the parents, especially of con-
flicts in attitudes within the mother or sexually stimulating behaviour
by the parents towards the child or, in extreme cases, incest. Within
the ‘participating’ group they believe that the majority of these victims
show no widespread maladjustment, but are simply submissive and

ASSOCIATIONS IN CRIME

seductive girls, ready to establish immediate, superficial relationships.
In a case from Lincolnshire where 18 young girls and 40 male persons
were said to have been involved, the probation officer stated that all
these girls had been willing participants acting from boredom and the
desperate need for some form of excitement and that sexual adventure
had become the vogue among them {The Times, 3.12.1963, Court of
Criminal Appeal).

With regard to adult women who are victims of the white slave
traffic, it has been maintained that 99 per cent of them are aware that
they are taking a risk, although they may not fully realize its serious-
ness, and that most of them are ‘neo-prostitutes’. 130

In the field of economic crime we have to refer to our previous dis-
cussion of the distinction made by many offenders according to the
type of property which they violate : if the victim is rich, or a big firm,
or the ‘Government’ or an insurance company, scruples of any kind
are entirely unknown, whereas the property of the small man is usually
respected (see pp. 583-4 above). The many ways in which property
owners, especially when insured, facilitate the work of thieves and
burglars are a well-known source of concern to the police, and the
often indifferent attitude of large stores to shoplifting has already
been commented upon (Chapter 23). 110 Art forgeries have become
the flourishing business which they are at present largely through the
ignorance, snobbery, and speculative habits of certain well-to-do
‘patrons’ (see above, p. 464).

This leads to the part played by the victim in cases of false pre-
tences. It has been examined in recent years by v. Hentig and Lenz,
the former, as usual, basing himself on individual cases taken from
American and German publications, the latter presenting the results
of a questionnaire enquiry and personal interviews with a considerable
number of victims. Lenz distinguishes ‘active’ victims, who ‘approach’
the swindler, and ‘passive’ ones who have to be approached by him,
which is similar to the distinction between participant and accidental
victims. Here, too, it is the first type who is in greater danger. For
reasons of space, no further details can here be given.

In a brilliant chapter v. Hentig deals with the victims of blackmail.
It is here, he points out, that the relationship between criminal and
victim has to be particularly close since the former can operate only
if he knows a secret of the victim. This, however, is a rule with at
least two exceptions : first, the criminal may have obtained possession
of the secret by mere chance without having established any relation-
ship with the victim; and, secondly, he may be successful, even with-
out knowing any secrets at all, provided his victim is in a position
where he has to fear even the most groundless accusations. We are
here reminded of Voltaire’s famous dictum: ‘If I were accused of

675

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

having stolen the towers of Notre Dame I would immediately go into
exile.’

Reference should be made to the attempts, made in the past decade
in this country, to introduce legislation for compensating the victims
of crimes of violence. Not surprisingly, in the report of the Working
Party set up a few years ago by the Government to study the practical
problems involved in the matter , 141 attention was drawn to the fact
that not all victims of crimes of violence are deserving of our sym-
pathy to the extent that public money should be spent on their behalf.
Clearly, further research in the field of victimology should be of
practical assistance to clarify the distinction between ‘deserving’ and
‘undeserving’ victims.

670

Chapter 26

AGE AND SEX FACTORS IN CRIME
I. THE AGE FACTOR 1

The purpose of this section is not to deal with the subject of juvenile
and adolescent delinquency as compared with that of adult crime in
its various aspects from the point of view of age. It is the far more
modest one to present some statistical figures to show how criminality
is spread over the different age groups, coupled with a few allied
questions arising from the age distribution.

This is a matter which has often attracted the interest of scholars,
and speculative theories have occasionally been produced, built on
statistical and other material of doubtful value. There can of course
be no objections to serious attempts of the kind discussed below to
use the statistical data available to explain the role of the age factor
in criminality and possibly even to draw conclusions of a causal
nature, provided we bear in mind their often all-too slender statistical
basis and the risks attached to any causal speculations. The main
points to be discussed are the following: First, the age curve itself,
i.e. the comparative frequency of crime in the different age groups
and changes in the types of crime with advancing age. Secondly, the
question at which age most offenders commit their first offence and
when they usually discontinue their criminal careers. Thirdly, are
members of certain age groups particularly likely to commit crime if
subjected to certain environmental experiences, or, to put it more
clearly, are there any ‘delinquent generations’ ? Fourthly, the special
problems of the elderly offender.

1 . The Age Curve

Even this apparently simple subject can lead to certain very puzzling
questions when studied comparatively for a number of countries. In
English Criminal Statistics it is presented more clearly than in most
others, related to 100,000 of the age or age group (see next pages),

A few comments on these figures may be helpful. First, while there
have been all-round increases between 1938 and 1962, they have been

677

the sociology of crime

TABLE SHOWING THE NUMBER OF PERSONS OF DIFFERENT
AGES FOUND GUILTY OF INDICTABLE OFFENCES

MALES

Age or age group Number of persons found
guilty per 100,000 of
population of the age or
age group
1962 1938

8

294

220

9

633

451

10

1,073

703

11

5,500

931

12

2,107

1,111

13

2,700

1,315

14

3,139

1,141

15

2,254

1,145

16

2,448

1,110

17

2,673

867

18

2,492

740

19

2,397

766

20

2,230

665

21 and under 25

1,930

559

25 and under 30

1,280

431

30 and under 40

749

307

40 and under 50

395

182

50 and under 60

183

101

60 and over

67

51

Total 895 393

particularly striking for the age groups 14 to 30. Secondly, the peak
age has shifted from 13 to 14 for males and from 18/19 to 14 for
females. Thirdly, while the youngest age groups of males have
throughout shown far higher crime rates than the ones over 50, this
is not so for the females where, except for those aged 60 and over, the
older women can well compete with the girls up to 10.

Those of us who may have been content to study these English
figures are inclined to take this early peak age and the far lower
criminality of older people for granted and regard them almost as a
law of nature. It is only when we look at them in the light of com-
parative material that we begin to ask a few more searching questions.
Such material from abroad, it is true, is not very comprehensive. For
some countries, especially the U.S.A., the figures are not representa-
tive; for others, for example Israel, they are not very revealing since
they are not related to the population figures. Moreover, as in most

AGE AND SEX FACTORS IN CRIME

FEMALES

Age or age group

Number of persons found
guilty per 100,000 of
population of the age or
age group

1962 1938

8

12

9

9

44

27

10

74

37

11

151

62

12

252

66

13

355

73

14

405

84

15

293

97

16

311

91

17

328

99

18

275

106

19

267

108

20

232

94

21 and under 25

207

77

25 and under 30

163

62

30 and under 40

141

61

40 and under 50

126

50

50 and under 60

89

30

60 and over

33

10

Total

131

51

note: Reprinted by permission ofH.M.S.O., London, from Criminal Statistics for England and
Wales 1962 (Cmd. 2120, Sept. 1963), p. xlviii. For Vol. I of the present book the corresponding
information (for the years 1938 and 1959) has been provided on p. 107.

countries there is no criminal responsibility below the ages of 13 or
14 these youngest groups, whatever their behaviour may be, are not
included in their criminal statistics and therefore we have hardly any
basis for treating one of the most striking features of English criminal
statistics comparatively. There are, however, a few exceptions. In
Japan, for example, although criminal responsibility begins at 14,
‘offences’ committed by younger children are shown in statistical in-
vestigations, 2 which will of course lead to doubts regarding the
reliability of these figures. Nevertheless, the following numbers of
arrests for 1955 may be of interest (omitting decimals): related to
100,000 of population — males under 14: 153; under 16: 1,043; under
18: 1,567; under 20 : 2,463 ; 20-25: 3,286; 25-30: 2,546; 30-40:
1,780; 40-50: 1,159; 50-60: 600; 60 and over: 258; Total 1,182.
Always bearing in mind that these are figures of arrests, not as the
English ones of findings of guilt, we see that, while the Japanese totals
are about 25 per cent higher, the figures for the younger age groups

679

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

up to 18 are lower, for the youngest even much lower, but those for
the age groups over 20 are much higher, for the oldest even very much
higher. For females the total is lower, 87 against 131, and the peak
occurs at 20-25 instead of 14, the rates for the older ones being not
much higher than in this country. No explanation of the strikingly
high rate for the oldest age groups of males (258 against 67) has been
given, and one wonders whether it may be due to differences in the
social services for old people. Equally striking is of course the fact
that the peak occurs at 20-25 instead of 14.

For West Germany 3 the following figures, also related to 100,000
of population, are available, which however cover both males and
females and lump together all age groups from 25 on; while therefore
not strictly comparable with the English figures they will nevertheless
illustrate a few differences (for 1958): 14-18: 993; 18-21: 1,543;
21-25: 1,683; 25 and over: 474; total 677. The fact that the total is
lower than the English might well be explained by the omission of
those under 14 and the inclusion of females. The rate for those be-
tween 14 and 18 is much lower, that for those between 18 and 21 still
considerably lower; the peak, occurring at 21-25, is also still lower
than the English, and for those of 25 and above it cannot be said
whether the figures are distributed similarly to the English ones, but
they do seem altogether lower. As these German figures cover all
offences punishable under the Federal Penal Code, their coverage is
at least as wide as, probably even wider than, the English figures
which refer only to indictable offences. It may be added that the
figures for 1954-7, although generally lower than those for 1958,
show exactly the same trends, and it can therefore be concluded that
the distribution just shown is not due to mere chance.

For France, Vouin and L6aute 4 present figures per 100,000 for 1954
which show a rise between 13 and 18 : from 308 for those between 13
and 16 to 619 for those between 16 and 18. Selosse 6 gives the following
data, per 1,000, for 1958 (males): 3-60 for 13, 5T2 for 14, 7-95 for 15,
12-05 for 16, 18-67 for 19, which is the peak age, and 11-18 for 20,
17-59 for the 21-30 group, 15-86 for 30-40. After the age of 40, the
figure drops to 9-20, which still far exceeds the English rates. Here
again we see, therefore, that the adolescent and young adults have a
lower and the older men a far higher rate than in England. The rate for
the 20-year-old ones is low because, as Selosse points out, their
military service gives them but little time for offending. For women
the peak lies much later than in England at 30-40, with 2-75, whereas
the English peak age of 14 has in France only 0-88 per 1,000.

The Italian figures for the period 1950-56 show, for both sexes
together, also per 1,000 of population, an even sharper rise from 0-71
for the 14-18 group to the peak of 4-61 for the 18-21 group and a

680

AGE AND SEX FACTORS IN CRIME

decline to 3-43 for the 21-25, rising again to 4-07 for the 25-30 group,
and thereafter a slow, but persistent decline to 2-87 for 40-50, 1-96
for 50-60, 1-09 for 60-70, and 0-45 afterwards.®

Without attempting to compare the total volume of crime in the
Continental countries so far mentioned— which would obviously be
futile— we note the tendency for the 14-18 group to have much lower
crime rates than in England and for the peak to be several years later.

The weak points in U.S. A. criminal statistics are too well-known to
require any further comments in the present context (see above.
Chapter 5, s. 6c). For juvenile delinquency they are particularly obvi-
ous. ‘There are at present no collections of data in this field that even
begin to compile comparable information’, wrote the Chief of the
Californian Bureau of Criminal Statistics not long ago. 7 We have to
be content with whatever data are available. In his painstaking study
of pre-war data Thorsten Sellin came to the conclusion that the
American peak age was at about 19,® and Reckless reported at the
same time that the maximum was reached somewhere between 19
and 24.®

For Soviet Russia, Callcott 10 gives the peak age before the last war
as at about 20-24 years for both sexes, with a sharp decline from then
up to 40 and a less marked one from 40 to 60.

It might be tempting further to compare the age curves for different
types of offences and for different periods of time, but this would
require far more space than we can reasonably be expected to give to
this subject. What cannot well be ignored, however, is the contrast
between England and Wales and practically all other countries re-
garding the peak age of crime, which has often aroused the interest
of foreign observers. Already Reckless, a quarter of a century ago,
commented on it and suggested two possible explanations: either the
administrative policy of the police and courts or the social order of
England which induces crime in young people at an earlier age. How-
ever, he wisely recommended the greatest caution in accepting any of
these statistics and explanations, and so did v. Hentig who pointed
out that one should not try to compare figures which were not com-
parable. 11 Other writers have drawn attention to the fact that the
male peak age was 13 when the school leaving age was 14, but moved
to 14 when the school leaving age was advanced to 15, posing the
question whether getting tired of school at a time when one feels
ready for something more adult and, in particular, more profitable
may towards the end of the waiting period lead to increased delin-
quency, especially if an overcrowded school class has but little to
° ii° res ^ ess youth. The subsequent decline in the crime rate
"would then prove the beneficial effect of gainful employment. This is
uo argument which can easily be used against the Crowther Report

681

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

of 1959 in its struggle for the raising of the school-leaving age to 16,
after many years of delay now finally approved but not yet carried
through, and it has therefore to be taken very seriously. 12 Again other
writers have referred to the biological changes occurring at certain
ages, in particular to the unsettling effect of puberty and pre-
puberty. 13 Here, however, the fact would have to be considered that
there are important differences in this respect between the various
constitutional types. According to Ernst Kretschmer, for example,
the leptosomes reach the peak age of their criminal activities much
earlier than the pyknics, whose peak lies at 40-50 which is the lowest
point for the leptosomes. 14 Moreover, the claim, which has recently
been made so strongly, that puberty is now reached one or even
several years earlier than, say, fifty years ago 15 seems to make the
biological interpretation difficult to reconcile with the moving of the
peak age of delinquency in the opposite direction.

The present writer is still inclined to attach very little significance
to these ‘peak age’ figures. He still adheres to his earlier view, re-
peated above, Chapter 5, s. 5(a), that statistics of juvenile delinquency
merely indicate ‘the varying degree of willingness on the part of the
public and the police to bring this category of delinquents before the
juvenile courts’. 10 The differences which have occurred in the figures
for the age groups 13 and 14 are not striking enough to require any
far-reaching explanations; they may simply be due to chance factors.
More important is the fact that the English peaks occur so much
earlier than in other countries; and here we may indeed be faced
partly with an earlier onset of delinquency, possibly due to parental
indifference, and partly to the earlier beginning of legal responsibility
for crime, which may create in some quarters an atmosphere favour-
able to court action with regard to younger age groups. All this, how-
ever, remains mere speculation, and it would require a wholesale
assimilation of the present English system to Continental standards
to see whether this would be followed by drastic changes in the age
curve of crime.

The very high share of the younger age groups in the country’s
total volume of crime can also be seen in the following percentage
figures of indictable offences for males (1962) : 17 out of a male total
of 864 per cent those between 8 and 14 produced 14-2 per cent, those
between 14 and 17: 15 per cent, 17 to 21 : 15-6 percent, together 44-8,
against 204 per cent for those 21 to 30 and 21 -2 per cent for those 30
and over. For females those between 8 and 21 had only 5 per cent out
of a total of 13-6 per cent. Females of 30 and over committed nearly
one half of the offences, males of that age less than one quarter.

Turning now to the changes in the type of crime which occur with
advancing age, the younger age groups are, roughly speaking, pre-

682

AGE AND SEX FACTORS IN CRIME

dominant in larceny and breakings, the older in receiving, frauds and
false pretences, white collar offences, and sexual offences. In Germany,
Hellmer found that thieves committed their first offences when they
were twelve years younger than sex offenders committing their first
sex offence. 18 The peak group for violence against the person is that
between 21 and 30, with 33*3 per cent, but those between 17 and 21
have increased their share from 10*3 per cent in 1938 to 27*5 per cent
in 1962. 19 These figures, which, by the way, refer only to Magistrates’
Courts, are misleading, however, as they are not related to the popu-
lation figures which are much higher, of course, for the far more
comprehensive age group of ‘30 and over’ than for those comprising
only the ten years 21 to 30 or the five years 17 to 21. Nevertheless,
they are in accordance with common experience and the results of
studies made of special samples. There is general agreement, for
example, that sexual offenders, as a group, are older than other cate-
gories of offenders, although this is not true of certain types of sex
offence such as indecent exposure. 20 In the Cambridge sample the
proportion of those between 21 and 40 was 51 per cent, of those 50
and over 15 per cent, together 66 per cent against 41-6 per cent in our
general figures above. Fitch gives the mean age of his group of sex
offenders as 35-36, which is also considerably higher than the general
mean age for prisoners in this country.

Of particular interest in this connection is the question whether
recidivists change the type of their criminal activities with advancing
age. In our study of the files of 1, 274 recidivists appearing before the
London Central Criminal Court comparatively little evidence was
found of such changes in a specific direction, although it did happen
that after a particularly heavy sentence men turned to less exhausting
crimes, such as coining or false pretences in the place of breaking
in. 21 Hammond, who examined the offences committed by preventive
. detainees after discharge, noticed slight changes in the type of offence
committed, notably from breaking to larceny. 22 The Gluecks, too,
found only comparatively insignificant changes in type of offence with
advancing age, notably a drift into ‘milder, less aggressive and less
daring forms of misconduct’. 23 There is but little evidence for the
popular assumption that criminals proceed with advancing age to
more and more serious types of crime; this is, in particular, untrue
of sexual offenders. An entirely different question is whether certain
types of crime are more frequent in certain age groups than in others;
here available statistics show quite clearly that there is a high correla-
tion between age and type of offence, with violence more prominent
in the adolescent and young adult groups, fraud, receiving, and sex
offences, as already shown, more in the middle age groups. 24

683

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

2. Various Specific Aspects of Age

Special attention was paid by the Gluecks in their follow-up studies
to the effect of ageing on type of offence as well as on abstaining from
further lawbreaking. With regard to the latter, they had first developed
the theory that reformation was due mainly to the fact of reaching a
certain chronological age, i.e. that of approximately thirty-five. Those
who had not reformed by then were less likely to do so afterwards. 25
A few years later, however, when analysing the results of a ten-years
follow-up of another group, they came to the conclusion, in some
ways already foreshadowed in their earlier work, that the crucial
factor was not arrival at a chronological age per se, but rather in con-
junction with ‘the achievement of adequate maturation’, which can
of course be greatly delayed by certain counteracting factors, especi-
ally mental abnormalities. 28 This seems to be only common sense, but
coupled with it was the suggestion that the abandonment of a
criminal career seems to occur ‘rather after the passage of a certain
length of time from the point of first expression of definite delinquent
trends’. 27 In other words, if the juvenile who first embarks on a
criminal career at the age of twelve may abandon it at, say, thirty, his
brother, who started at seventeen, was more likely to reform at
thirty-five. Those who have entered the field of crime in their youth
require a certain length of time to get criminality out of their systems,
regardless of their ages at the start. This suggestion has been criti-
cized, 28 especially as it contradicts another generally held belief that
those whose offences begin early in life are more likely to become
dangerous and persistent adult criminals than are those who start
late. This is the theory propagated in the important, but controversial
work of the Swiss criminologist Erwin Frey, who made the reserva-
tion, however, that an early start of criminality was predictive of
adult recidivism only when accompanied by early Verwahrlosung, a
term so vague that it can cover almost any form of unmanageable
and deviant behaviour. 20 Frey found that in his sample the percentage
of adult recidivists among those who had been juvenile delinquents
was about seven times as high as among those who had not been
delinquents in their youth. The development of adult recidivism, he
concluded, is in nearly all cases foreshadowed by juvenile delin-
quency. Obviously, this is a matter of considerable importance for
the understanding and prediction of persistent adult crime. Research
on it is often made difficult or impossible through absence of reliable
data on early offences of juveniles, 30 but a limited amount of informa-
tion is available. In the Borstal Prediction Study it was found that
those Borstal boys who had been first found guilty at the age of 11 or

AGE AND SEX FACTORS IN CRIME

under had a failure rate after discharge of 65 per cent, whereas for
those with the first finding of guilt at ages 12-15 it was 54 per cent
and for those with the first finding of guilt at 16-21 it was only 46 per
cent. 31 The Gluecks, too, predicted a higher failure rate in prisons for
offenders who had first been arrested under the age of 11 than for
those aged 11 or older, 32 and Hammond also regards the age at first
offence as prognostic of the likelihood of committing a further
offence 33 Of the 1,274 recidivists on whom information was pre-
sented in Social Aspects of Crime, 13 -6 per cent had been found guilty
before the age of 14, and only 51 after reaching the age of 40 (p. 358).
Benson, Taylor, West, and Norval Morris all report that in their
respective samples the mean ages at first conviction were later than
expected, i.e. roughly between 18 and 20, but they are equally scep-
tical about the reliability of their results since, as Benson puts it, ‘50
years ago country police forces were very haphazard in reporting
juvenile offences to C.R.O.’ 34 In view of what has been said before,
the present writer need hardly add that he is even less impressed by
these figures. To complete this brief survey of the evidence we turn to
Japan, where an investigation was made in 1950 of the ages of
recidivists aged over 40 committed to Fuchu Prison, with the result
that recidivism was far more serious in the case of those who had
committed their first offences between 14 and 17 than of those who
had started later in life. 35 Moreover, in Austria too Roland Grass-
berger, in a particularly careful investigation, showed that the likeli-
hood and speed of recidivism was closely related to the age at first
conviction. 36 Thorsten Sellin (see Note 36) quotes Quetelet’s dictum
that ‘among all the causes that influence the growth and abatement
of the penchant for crime, age is without question the most energetic'
( Recherches sur le penchant au crime aux different ages, 2nd ed.,
Bruxelles, 1833, pp. 63-4).

Summing up this part of our discussion we might make the follow-
ing points: First, the popular view that those who begin to offend
very early in life are destined to carry on a criminal career of increas-
ing gravity is true, but only in a limited sense. The mere fact that the
crime rate declines very sharply, whether as in England after 14 or as
in most other countries after young adult age, already shows that
only a small proportion of juvenile delinquents ever become persistent
adult criminals. While it is true that those who start early and have
an unfavourable childhood are more likely to carry on than those
who start later, this tendency should therefore not be over-estimated.

econdly, for those who continue their criminal activities in adult
i e, the question arises at what later stage they are likely to dis-
continue them. The finding of the Gluecks that the age of 35 is the
crucial watershed has so far not been confirmed by English statistics.

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

According to Benson’s material, drawn from Dartmoor and Park-
hurst Prisons, ‘between the ages of 30 and 55 there is not much to
choose. Nor do the records of the failures suggest a gradual diminu-
tion of criminality after 35. Indeed the number now serving long
sentences of imprisonment and preventive detention is depressing.’
Nevertheless, Benson concludes, it would be wrong to abandon hope
for the middle-aged criminal. In particular, we may add, the slender
hope of redemption through a happy marriage or constructive train-
ing always exists. Between the ages of 30 and 60, Benson calculates,
something like 80 per cent, or allowing for the death rate, 70 per cent
‘disappear from the ken of the police by ceasing to recidivate or by
death’, while ‘of 100 aged 55 we can expect 27 to cease before the age
of 60’. The possibility of police failure to detect new offences is dis-
carded by Benson as negligible in cases of men already known as
recidivists.

There are still two more specific points to be dealt with. First, the
question of ‘delinquent generations'. Whereas we have so far been
concerned with the crime rates of individuals on reaching certain
ages, we are now faced with the problem of the criminality of whole
generations, whole cohorts born within a certain period and under-
going certain common experiences such as war. Can it be proved that
children born between 1935 and 1942 have developed stronger delin-
quent tendencies than those born in other seven-year periods? As
mentioned above (Chapter 23, text to Note 222), this question has
been fully examined by ingenious statistical techniques and answered
in the affirmative by Leslie T. Wilkins, In his own words, ‘the greatest
“crime-proneness” is thus found to be associated with that birth
group who passed through their fifth year during the war . . . There
appears to be something particularly significant in social disturbances
occurring in the fourth and fifth year of a child’s life.’ Without wish-
ing here to speculate about possible explanations of this phenomenon
— of which a few are tentatively presented by Wilkins — we have to
say that it is only natural to expect delinquency to march, so to speak,
in whole battalions or generations. If we accept the idea that, in spite
of all individual differences, human beings as a mass tend to react to
similar environmental stimuli in roughly similar ways and that this
tendency is even stronger in the case of individuals having certain im-
portant biological or psychological factors in common, it is clear that
individuals of the same age undergoing similar disruptive influences
such as war will be more likely to show similar responses than in-
dividuals of different ages. One important statistical exception to the
‘general rule of birth group effects’ was noted by Wilkins: the crime
rate among young males between 17 and 21 years of age greatly
exceeded the expected rate; for them, ‘some increase in criminality

686

age and sex factors in crime

might have been expected, but not to the extent found to occur’.
Wilkins’s main thesis has been sharply criticized on statistical grounds
by both G. Prys Williams and A. A. Walters (Note 1). It is not
within the competence of a non-statistician to take sides in this argu-
ment, but it might well be argued that, while refined statistical tech-
niques of the kind here used by the contestants can well produce
interesting conclusions based on the available figures, they can never
be a substitute for reliable basic material. As we regard the available
statistics of juvenile offences as singularly unreliable we are unable to
subscribe to any results based on statistical manipulation, however
brilliant, of such statistics. Wilkins himself admits the many pitfalls
of criminal statistics in his Social Deviance, esp. pp. 145 ff. Of course
the fact that similar investigations in Denmark and New Zealand
have confirmed Wilkins’ findings is an important factor in their
favour, unless we assume that they all suffer from the same weak-
nesses of their basic material.

The second subject to which attention might here be drawn is the
criminality of those who enter the field of crime at an unusually late
age. Unless we extend the term ‘latecomer’, as Cormier does, to all
those first convicted after reaching the age of 20, they are compara-
tively few in numbers; but nevertheless they form an important
group. Benson calculated that about 4 per cent of his sample had
commenced their criminal careers after 30, Norval Morris about 5
per cent; in Social Aspects of Crime the present writer’s figure was 8
per cent of the men and 1 1 per cent of the women, for those over 40
it was 4 per cent of men and less than 3 per cent of women (p. 358).
To a considerable extent, these low figures are of course merely due
to failure to detect earlier delinquency. In most life histories of
criminals we find references to unreported juvenile offences, mostly
not very serious ones, but offences nevertheless which if recorded
would upset the official picture. ‘Charlie Smith’, the ‘unknown citizen’,
is a typical example: officially, he had no record until the age of 30,
but actually, his sister reports, already at the orphanage ‘he was
always getting into trouble for stealing and lying’, and later in the
Army ‘he was always in trouble there too, for the same kind of
thing’. 37 While the responsibility for these statements has of course
to be left to his sister, it is unlikely that she should have been un-
truthful in this respect. Generally speaking, all one can say is that the
actual proportion of late starters is probably much smaller than
appears from the official figures, and that in such cases where detec-
tion and punishment were delayed until manhood the absence of any
such official ‘warning’ may have acted as an encouragement to con-
tinue on the path of crime. Nevertheless, there can be no doubt that
late recruits to crime do exist in far from negligible numbers, and with

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

the growing interest in gerontology and the psychiatric and social
problems connected with ageing its criminological repercussions have
been repeatedly studied in the last decades, though of course to a
smaller extent than the far more important subject of juvenile delin-
quency. Three principal types of latecomers to crime can be dis-
tinguished: the first, smallest, group consists of those rare idealists
who, on reaching middle age with an unblemished and in some cases
even highly distinguished record, are suddenly faced with a problem,
political or social, occasionally also a personal one, which threatens
to undermine their whole Weltanschauung , the very foundation on
which their moral existence has so far firmly rested. Consequently,
for the first time in their lives seriously beginning to doubt the justice
of the established order of things they eventually become rebels and
lawbreakers. Such figures play a prominent part in world literature; 38
they are probably rarer in real life, except for the history of revolu-
tions. Political assassins are usually youngish men, but the leaders
often belong to more mature age groups.

Entirely different are the other two categories of latecomers; their
motives do not spring from their strong moral, political or religious
convictions, but are those of the ordinary offender, with the difference
that only in mid-life do they encounter financial or sexual difficulties
with which they cannot cope by lawful means. After committing their
first crime, however, these two categories part company; while the
members of the one group abstain from further lawbreaking, the
others continue and often become persistent criminals. In Social
Aspects it was found that many of those who started after the age of
40 became habituals with twenty or more convictions.

Among those who do not become recidivists are of course particu-
larly prominent the elderly jealousy murderers with definite psychi-
atric symptoms such as mentioned above in Chapter 14, although the
case histories published by Shepherd include also many men in their
mid-thirties. In the case of many normal offenders of maturer age,
too, the shock of detection and punishment, with accompanying
publicity, is often enough to keep them straight, especially if their
family finks remain intact and they can find employment.

Among those of the last category, who become habitual criminals
at a mature age, are some truly tragic cases. There is, for example, a
man of 71, educated at a public school and a graduate of Cambridge,
who was deprived of his assets and means of livelihood as a result of
the Second World War, when some of his property was lost in Paris
where he had worked and the rest was bombed in London. This led
to a number of offences since 1949 and, eventually in 1962, to a
sentence of five years’ preventive detention, changed by the Court of
Criminal Appeal to one of five years’ imprisonment, for stealing

AGE AND SEX FACTORS IN CRIME

valuable books from the Bodleian Library, Oxford. 39 On the other
hand, there is some evidence that among these latecomers are many
who commit their offences not because of a breakdown of their
financial existence or their family bonds, but rather on account of,
sometimes prematurely occurring, symptoms of psycho-physiological
senility (Chapter 14, 1 (d) aggravating their social inadequacy. 40

A valuable attempt has been made by the Canadian psychiatrist
Bruno M. Cormier and his co-workers 41 to summarize the charac-
teristics of latecomers, classified according to decades, beginning with
those in their twenties — which seems to be rather early for the concept
of ‘latecomer’ — and ending with those in their fifties, which seems to
leave out the very small but not unimportant group who start after
60. His observations are derived from the personal study of 318 in-
mates of the Canadian Federal St. Vincent de Paul Penitentiary, first
offenders aged 20 years or more and serving sentences of at least two
years. Although we cannot accept the labelling of offenders under 30
as ‘latecomers’ and although some of his views may appear to be
based on too narrow a factual basis, his work contains much of
general interest, and our brief summary does not pretend to do
justice to it. For example, among those in their twenties he found
only rarely the ‘lone operator’; most of them, while not like the
adolescents members of gangs, tended to associate with a few criminal
partners. Some of them had been protected by their families up to
manhood and broke down as soon as they lost this protection. Many
cases showed serious personal and social problems and an anti-social
attitude, committing crime as an act of retaliation against society. As
compared with them, those who became first offenders in their
thirties were but rarely rebels with basic anti-social attitudes; their
problems were more personal, often connected with unhappy mar-
riages or with sexual disappointments in originally sound marriages,
looking for new. experiences or taking to drink. Recidivism is less
frequent here than among those in their twenties. All these dis-
appointments appear in even more intense forms in those who start
when in their forties; many of them are seriously depressed, and in
Cormier’s pregnant phrase crime represents for them ‘a last attempt
at youth. Many men in this group come to the penitentiary because
in their 40’s for the first time in their lives they begin to act as if they
were in their 20’s.’ Needless to say, such men are miles apart from
the late rebels of our first category. Loneliness, physical and emotional
deterioration are the chief characteristics of those who become first
offenders in their fifties or still later. The probability of recidivism
declines fairly steadily from about 65 or 75 per cent for those in their
twenties to about 45 to 50 per cent for the older groups.

ccn~T

689

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

II. the sex factor: female delinquency 42
1. Introductory Remarks

Before going into the details of this fascinating subject, the following
general points have to be made.

(a) While there is no doubt that according to official statistics and
our general impressions the total female crime rate is much lower
everywhere than that of males we should avoid the frequent mistake
of studying the subject solely under such comparative aspects. This
one-sided approach inevitably induces the observer to search for
nothing but plausible explanations of the differential crime rate and
unwittingly to limit his attention to those factors which are likely to
furnish good reasons why females should commit less crime than
males. An objective and scientific approach should try to treat female
crime as a topic in its own right, which does not, of course, make fre-
quent comparisons with its male counterpart unnecessary. Nor does
it mean that we should try to understand female criminality exclu-
sively from the sexual angle.

( b ) Another mistake often found in statistical comparisons of the
sex rates is to ignore the striking differences between the various
categories of offences and between the various age groups. For the
latter, reference can be made to the statistical tables above in section
I, which show that the contrast between the overall male and female
crime rates varies considerably according to age; while, for example,
the 1962 ratio for the eight-year-old ones was 24 males to one female,
for those 60 and over it was only two males to one female. The posi-
tion when compared with pre-war figures has, on the whole, changed
to the advantage of women, especially in the older age groups. A
striking contrast between male and female crime rates, as also shown
in our tables, lies in the far smaller variations in the female rates, the
male peak age figures being about 46 times higher than the lowest
ones, whereas for females the peak age figures are only about 12
times higher than the lowest. In pre-war years the contrast was, as far
as the male figures were concerned, less striking. 43

The sex differences for individual offences will be discussed below.

(c) Criminologists have occasionally been criticized for paying but
scant attention to the subject of female crime. Lady Wootton in
particular has accused them of being prejudiced and ‘curiously blind
to the obvious’; ‘hardly anyone seems to have thought it worthwhile
to try to find out’ why there was such a difference in the respective
crime rates. 44 If this were true we might well ask why this distinguished
author, with her exceptionally favourable equipment both as a scholar

690

AGE AND SEX FACTORS IN CRIME

and as a female protagonist, did not make use of her opportunities to
fill the gap. In fact, the accusation is not altogether well-founded. It is
certainly true that much less research has so far been done on the
characteristics and possible explanations of female than on those of
male crime, but this is largely due not to ‘blindness’ but to the com-
parative scarcity of case material and the greater difficulty of access
to it; to the smaller numbers of female research workers who would
be particularly interested in the subject and qualified to do research
on it; and to the difficulties presented to statistical enquiries by the
small numbers of cases. In any case, it is a distortion of the truth to
maintain that the subject has been entirely ignored. Female scholars
such as Pauline Tamowsky, the Russian student of Lombroso, the
Dutch lawyer Johanna C. Hudig, the American sociologist Mabel A.
Elliott, the English psychiatrists Grace W. Pailthorpe, Hedwig
Schwarz and Phyllis Epps, and the psychiatric social worker Moya
Woodside — a list which is by no means complete — have made valu-
able contributions to it, and a not inconsiderable literature has also
been produced by several male authors.

(d) There is, however, another point of fundamental importance
which has not often received in criminological literature the attention
due to it, i.e. the fact that hitherto female crime has, for all prac-
tical purposes, been dealt with almost exclusively by men in their
various capacities as legislators, judges, policemen; and at least up
to the end of the last century the same was true of the theoretical
treatment of the subject not only by scholars but also by poets and
novelists. This could not fail to create a one-sided picture. It has been
said, not without justification, that what human beings think of
members of the opposite sex is usually the result of their personal
disappointments and therefore distorted. This centuries-old male
predominance in theory and practice and the consequent distortions
have, however, not throughout worked in the expected direction, i.e.
to the disadvantage of females, but may indeed rather have favoured
them in various ways. Men seem to have made penal laws mainly to
prevent and punish actions which they thought endangered their
personal interests, whereas certain specifically female forms of mis-
conduct were often regarded as not serious enough or too pleasant
or indispensable to them to warrant penal measures. The legislators,
being males, may unwittingly have moulded the whole system of
criminal law in such a way as to turn a blind eye to some of those
anti-social actions most frequently committed by women, such as
prostitution — which, unless accompanied by certain other activities,
is not an offence in most countries — or lesbianism, lying or quarrel-
ling. However, as the example of witchcraft shows, this hypothesis
should not be stretched too far. Nevertheless, there have been

691

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

occasional traces of what might be regarded as a guilty conscience in
this man-made criminal law, showing that male legislators, aware of
the under-privileged position of women in pre-twentieth-century
society, have made special efforts to protect them against some of the
consequences of that lack of equality. In this connection the English
common law presumption has to be mentioned that a woman who
committed a felony (except murder or treason) in the presence of her
husband had committed it under compulsion and was therefore
entitled to an acquittal, but this presumption was abolished by the
Criminal Justice Act, 1925, s. 47, because of the improved social posi-
tion and consequent greater independence of women. 45 A statutory
provision in favour of women, but limited to one crime, infanticide,
is contained in the Infanticide Act, 1938. On a far broader basis rests
art. 37L of the Cuban Penal Code of 1936, which accords the benefit
of mitigating circumstances to a woman who has committed a crime
when under the influence of a mental disturbance due to climacterium,
pregnancy, menstruation or the abnormal effect of childbirth. 46 On
the other hand in a few countries adultery is a punishable offence
only for women or at least punished more severely and in a more
general fashion in the case of women than of men. 47

The fact that homosexual acts between women are in most countries
exempt from punishment — one of the few exceptions is Austria — has
not entirely escaped criticism and has also occasionally been used as
an argument against the penalization of male homosexuality. The
West German Constitutional Court had to deal in 1957 with the case
of two men found guilty of homosexual offences who claimed that the
legal provisions under which they had been punished were against the
principle of equality before the law, anchored in the West German
Constitution, and therefore null and void. Art. 3 of the Constitution
provides that men and women enjoy equal rights and that nobody
should be treated better or worse for reasons of his or her sex only.
The Court rejected this argument because equality before the law did
not exclude differential legal treatment justified by fundamental bio-
logical differences ; because of the existence of such differences female
homosexuality, the Court held, was a phenomenon quantitatively
and qualitatively not comparable to its male counterpart. The experts
whose opinions were decisive for this judgment included the psychi-
atrist Ernst Kretschmer and the Austrian criminologist Grassberger,
the latter pointing out that in Austria in the period 1946-53 the num-
ber of women sentenced for homosexual offences was less than 4 per
cent of the men sentenced for such offences, a difference which he
thought could not be explained by a larger hidden number of un-
detected or at least not prosecuted female offences. The German
Draft Penal Code of 1962 accepts the view of the Constitutional

692

AGE AND SEX FACTORS IN CRIME

Court and limits the penalization of homosexual acts as before to
males. 43

In addition to such legal distinctions made in favour of the female
sex there is further the inequality observed in detection and the prac-
tice of prosecution and sentencing. It has been argued by several
investigators that women tend to commit mainly such offences which,
by their very nature, can be detected only with special difficulties and
are, even if detected, only rarely reported and prosecuted. Poliak
mentions in particular non-professional shoplifting, thefts by prosti-
tutes and domestic servants, abortions, perjury' and indecent ex-
posure. 49 To some extent this argument is probably correct, but exact
proof is obviously impossible to obtain, and it can also be maintained
that there are certain specifically male offences which show very low
rates of detection too, such as burglary and housebreaking. While
many of Poliak’s points may be valid, one gets the impression that in
his efforts to show that the sex difference in crime rates is actually
much smaller than generally assumed he goes too much to the other
extreme and tends to under-rate the size of the dark numbers in male
criminality. As far as pilfering from employers is concerned, for
example, male workers have probably the same opportunities as their
female colleagues, and the proportion of those who use these oppor-
tunities is probably not lower than in the case of women, but all this
is hardly more than mere conjecture. For blackmail v. Hentig offers
some interesting observations to show that men are more vulnerable
and open to exploitation by female secretaries, chambermaids or
prostitutes, and that such acts of blackmail committed by women
will very rarely reach the courts. 50 This, too, is very likely correct,
but no exact proof is possible.

It is, however, not only the type of offence but also their manner of
participating in it which reduces the official crime rate of women as
they are more likely to play the role of instigator, aider and abetter
than that of the actual doer, and it is usually more difficult to detect
the former than the latter. 51 Our criminal law and, we might add, our
administration of criminal justice are ‘almost exclusively doer-
centred’ (Reckless). 52 As criminal statistics do not distinguish accord-
ing to differences in participation it cannot be proved statistically,
however, that there is such a sex difference in the kind of participa-
tion, and we are mainly dependent on the observation of individual
cases.

Closely connected with the form of participation is the sex difference
concerning acquittal: as those who take part in crime in less direct
ways than as actual doers are more difficult to track down they stand
a better chance of being acquitted in case of prosecution. To take, for
example, a few post-war years at random, in 1954 of 17,806 males and

693

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

930 females brought before Assizes and Quarter Sessions, which is a
ratio of 19:1, 1,739 males and 141 females were acquitted, i.e. 12:1. In
1961, 33,040 males and 1,284 females were brought to trial before
Assizes and Quarter Sessions, i.e. a ratio of 25:1, whereas acquittals
numbered 2,784 males against 163 females, i.e. a ratio of 17:1. 63 That
members of the public are far more reluctant to take action against
girls than against boys is common knowledge and accounts, at least
to some extent, for the disparity of cases brought before the juvenile
courts. Where proceedings are taken they are more often for being in
need of care and protection or beyond parental control than for
criminal offences, even in cases where the latter have actually been
committed.

Moreover, when charged and found guilty women are more leni-
ently treated by the courts than men, 54 but this does not of course
affect the crime rate with which we are here primarily concerned. In
many cases this greater leniency is probably justified, but in some
others it is entirely misplaced.

On the other hand, the treatment facilities available for female
offenders are usually even less adequate and up-to-date than those
for males, mainly because their smaller numbers make it more difficult
to classify, staff and equip institutions. The story of women in English
prisons has been told in detail in Ann D. Smith’s monograph (see
Note 42); with a few exceptions, such as the open prisons, it is a
rather dismal story, culminating in the sentence that ‘in 1961 the
shadow of Holloway still hangs over the prison system for women in
Britain’ (p. 324). Holloway, however, is by no means the only blot on
this system ; another is the presence there of large numbers of female
‘drunks’ for whom no constructive alternative methods of treatment
have ever been consistently tried, whereas special training courses
have been established for the increasing number of women sent to
prison for cruelty to or neglect of children. 55 Actually, while the
institutional treatment of delinquent women is, in some ways, even
more difficult than that of men, there are also reasons why it
could be made more progressive than the latter. The security aspect
is less intricate as public opinion is less insistent here on maximum
security than in the case of male prisoners, and the smaller numbers
involved should make individual case work more easy to practise.
On the other hand, the recruitment of suitable staff presents addi-
tional problems. A particularly intractable subject has always been
the institutional treatment of adolescent girls. In a report by a Joint
Committee of the British Medical Association and the Magistrates’
Association on the problem of the unstable adolescent girl the con-
clusion was reached that ‘not only are facilities for dealing with these
girls inadequate, but those that are available are often of the wrong

AGE AND SEX FACTORS IN CRIME

kind’. 66 This was written soon after the last war, and the position has
improved since then; nevertheless, even the — certainly not over-
critical— Ingleby Report of 1960 refers to the need for more varied
vocational training schemes and the difficulty of recruiting senior
staff of suitable quality in girls’ approved schools, and reports that
only twelve out of the thirty-three existing schools had psychiatrists
to visit them for regular sessions. 57 Detention centres (Criminal
Justice Act, 1948, s. 1 8) have for many years been regarded, on psycho-
logical grounds, as an unsuitable form of training for girls and it was
only in 1962 that the objections have been over-ruled and the first
centre has been opened; no results are so far available. These few
scattered observations are not intended to provide a picture of the
whole complex subject of the penal and correctional treatment of
female offenders, but merely to show some of the many problems
peculiar to this side of the system.

2. Historical Sketch of Female Delinquency

Historically seen, the crimes in which women were mostly involved in
former ages used to be adultery and incest, witchcraft, poisoning and
infanticide. Penologists and legal historians have collected much
material to show how in ancient society, before the coming into
existence of a state penal system, women caught in adultery were
punished by their husbands exercising their right as heads of the
family. 68 Penologists have also studied the medieval differences in
penal methods as applied to the two sexes; drowning, burning or
burying alive were regarded as particularly appropriate forms of
execution for women in the Middle Ages. 69 In the medieval witch-
craft trials women had to bear the brunt of the prosecutions because
they were believed to be more likely to enter into sexual relations with
the devil. 60 A fascinating international history of the witchcraft trials
has recently been published in German by Kurt Baschwitz. He shows
that most of the accused were elderly women and poor specimens.
Jeanne d’Arc was one of the exceptions, but according to Baschwitz
she was tried not for witchcraft but for heresy; although the original
indictment had been for witchcraft, too, this point was dropped in
the course of the proceedings. 61 The great astronomer Johann Kepler
succeeded in 1621, after a struggle lasting six years, to rescue his
mother from the stake. In some cases, in Sweden, for example, the
authorities used children as witnesses against women accused of
witchcraft (p. 318), and the same happened in the famous trial at
Salem, Massachusetts (Baschwitz, Chapter 9). The last of these
trials took place in the middle or towards the end of the eighteenth
century.

695

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

According to Pike, women were continually mentioned in the
fourteenth century not only as receivers of stolen property but also
in connection with brigandage and other crimes of violence; they
were, he writes, often ‘almost as brutal as their husbands or para-
mours’, 62 and among the masses of vagrants women, too, played a
prominent part not only as companions of the males but often without
them as prostitutes and beggars. 63 Later, in the eighteenth century,
the type of female crime which attracted most of the attention of
criminal law reformers and poets was infanticide; Radbruch and
Gwinner call it ‘the key offence of all eighteenth-century efforts to
modernize the medieval criminal law’. 64 The tragic story ofGretchen
in Goethe’s Faust has, as these authors remind us, at least in part to
be traced back to the execution of a Frankfurt woman for infanticide;
and other great contemporary German poets, such as Schiller and
Burger, made effective propaganda in their works for the abolition of
the death penalty for this crime. That the French Revolution should
greatly stimulate such efforts was only natural, and it is not surprising
that a prize-competition held in 1780 in Germany on the question
‘Which are the most practicable means to prevent infanticide?’
elicited nearly four hundred replies, among them Pestalozzi’s book on
the subject. Infanticide came to be regarded as one of the crimes
symptomatic of the callous exploitation by the aristocracy of women
belonging to the lower social classes.

At the same time, however, women who were themselves members
of the French aristocracy took a prominent part in crimes of an
entirely different kind. In the sensational ‘Affair of the Queen’s [i.e.
Marie Antoinette’s] Necklace’,- which was widely believed to bear
some of the responsibility for the downfall of Louis XVI and his
dynasty, the Comtesse de la Motte played the leading part, and the
Marquise de Brinvilliers 65 had already made criminal history in the
seventeenth century by using for the first time arsenic on a large scale
to poison first some hospital patients, whom she used for experi-
mental purposes, and afterwards several members of her own family.

There has been much less glamour in female crime since those
romantic happenings, and the scene has been largely dominated by
such more prosaic offences as drunkenness, prostitution, cruelty to
children, shoplifting, and, of late, motoring offences.

3. The Statistical Sex Ratio for Different Countries and Individual
Offences

International comparisons are as hazardous in this field as in all
others. Since we dealt with them a quarter of a century ago in Social
Aspects of Crime (pp. 334-5) work has been done on the subject

696

AGE AND SEX FACTORS IN CRIME

mainly by Poliak, who has made a gallant attempt to use international
statistics to answer the question whether the ‘progressing social
equalization between the sexes and particularly the entrance of women
into ever wider fields of economic pursuits’ has led to an increase in
the volume of female crime and thereby reduced the gap in the sex
ratio (Poliak, Chapter 4). He stresses, besides other difficulties, that
international comparisons can make sense only if they relate to
periods showing Toughly the same stage of social and economic
development. The periods of the two world wars, by producing similar
problems and upheavals in belligerent and to a lesser degree also in
neutral countries, provide, Poliak suggests, the best basis for com-
parisons obtainable in the circumstances (see also above. Chapter 23 D).
The conclusion he draws from his fairly detailed studies is that in all
those countries the social emancipation of women has produced in-
creases in female crimes against property. This corroborates our find-
ings in Britain in War and Crime 66 for the early stages of the Second
World War, where it was pointed out, however, that the widening of
their sphere of activities and the disturbance of family life had pro-
duced an increase not only in female delinquency but also in crimes
committed against women.

It is in line with these observations that the total sex ratio of crime
should be more unfavourable for women in highly industrialized and
densely populated than in agricultural countries. Ignoring the war
and immediate post-war years the figures reproduced in Social
Aspects (p. 335) from Hacker’s computation do not seem to have
considerably changed. In a so far unpublished study of crime in
Lusaka, the capital of Northern Rhodesia (now Zambia), William
Clifford found a very low proportion of female offenders (in 1958-9
only 62 out of 3,127 cases). There are, however, a few striking excep-
tions. In France, for example, the proportion of female offenders has
gone down from about 15 per cent to 5 per cent or, excluding the
North-African prisoners, to 6*6 per cent. Pinatel, from whom these
figures are taken, stresses, however, the great gap between the official
and the actual rate of female delinquency and the important role
played by women behind the scene. 67 For the U.S. A., where Hacker’s
figure for 1923 was 1:11*06, Reckless quotes for 1955 a ratio of 1:8
arrests. 6 ® Needless to say, the rate of females in prison is, here as
everywhere else, much lower, 1 : 1 8. In Hacker’s computation Belgium,
one of the most highly industrialized and most densely populated of
all countries, had the highest female crime rate, 1:3 against, for
example, Finland’s 1 :22 and Sweden’s 1:18. For England and Wales
the rate has slightly deteriorated from 1:7*4 to 1:6 (persons found
guilty of indictable offences). At the time when official criminal
statistics began to be regularly published in this country the rate was

697

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

even more unfavourable for women. As quoted above (Chapter 5,
s. 2), in 1805 slightly under one-third of all those convicted at Assizes
and Quarter Sessions were women.

All these figures for crime as a whole are of little significance, how-
ever; what really matters are the rates for individual offences. Already
in Social Aspects (p. 335) attention was drawn to the possibility that
the total female crime picture of a given country may be wholly
dominated by one particular offence which may be of very little im-
portance elsewhere, partly because of different climatic, social or
economic conditions and partly because of the state of the criminal
law. This was the case with drunkenness in Sweden and libel in Ger-
many. How enormous the differences for specific offences in fact are
has been shown in Social Aspects for England in the period 1932-6
(pp. 338-40), ranging from those for offences where the female rate
is higher than the male, such as concealment of birth or abortion, to
those where it is only slightly lower, such as bigamy, attempted
murder, larceny by a servant and from shops and stalls, and attempted
suicide, and finally to those where the female rate is almost insignifi-
cant as compared with the male (e.g. shopbreaking 1:243, larceny of
pedal cycles 1:164, or takings and thefts of motor vehicles 1:121 for
Assizes and Quarter Sessions and 1:157 for Courts of Summary
Jurisdiction). In more recent years the proportion has for many
offences changed in favour of women. For 1961, for example, the
following figures of persons convicted by Assizes and Quarter
Sessions may be quoted (from Criminal Statistics England and Wales
1961 , Table HI): capital murder 0:9, non-capital murder 1:20,
attempted murder 1 : 5-5, manslaughter under s. 2, Homicide Act,
1957 (i.e. with diminished responsibility), 1 :2, other manslaughter
1:10, felonious wounding 1 : 37-7, incest 1:14, burglary 1:42, house-
breaking 1:17, shopbreaking 1:80 (the last three being more un-
favourable to women than the pre-war rates), larceny by servant 1 :9.
The number of persons aged 21 and over convicted of larceny from
shops and stalls by Magistrates’ Courts was 3,667 males and 7,319
females; of those between 17 and 21 it was 789 males and 811 females,
whereas for those between 14 and 17 found guilty of such offences it
was 2,014 males and 1,372 females and for those under 14 it was
3,598 male and 1,299 females. For the non-indictable offences
against the intoxicating liquor laws the rates (of persons proceeded
against. Criminal Statistics 1961, Table II) are 1 : 1 2.8 for simple and
1 : 17-6 for aggravated drunkeness, which means a considerable im-
provement against pre-war years. For motoring offences the following
rates may be quoted: reckless or dangerous driving 1:58, driving
while under the influence of drink or a drug 1 : 57.5, which is even far
more favourable than the rates for non-motorized drunks. Does this

698

AGE AND SEX FACTORS IN CRIME

mean that women who can afford to drive a car while drunk are
better treated than those who are content to lie on the pavement in an
intoxicated condition? Or are they really less given to drink?

4. Possible Explanations of the Differential Sex Rate

Notwithstanding the existence of many strong arguments which make
it likely that the ‘masked’ sector of female crime is much larger pro-
portionally than its male counterpart and that the actual difference
between the male and female sex rates is therefore considerably
smaller than shown in official statistics, it is nevertheless almost uni-
versally agreed that such a difference does in fact exist in favour of
the female sex. The exact extent of this difference is likely to vary
greatly between different countries and civilizations, offences, and
age groups. We have now to ask for possible explanations of this
phenomenon and also, as pointed out before, try to understand the
factors behind female crime regardless of its numerical relations to
the male crime rate.

Naturally, most of the attempts so far made follow the traditional
pattern by dividing their explanations into physical, psychological,
and sociological ones and trying to combine them in an eclectic
manner. We are not in a position radically to break with this pattern
which is, after all, in line with our general approach. Poliak’s sugges-
tion that on close analysis the tripartition could be replaced by a
bipartition, omitting the psychological section (p. 121), does not
seem to be acceptable. As pointed out above, physical and social or
economic factors can become operative only by going through the
‘transformator’ of a psychological or psychiatric factor. 69

(a) Physical Factors. As above in Chapters 11-13, a distinction has
to be made between physical factors of whatever kind which might
possibly affect criminal behaviour, on the one hand, and defi ni te
physical types, on the other. The evidence presented in Chapter 1 1 on
the prevalence of physical defects and illnesses among juvenile
offenders was not regarded as particularly strong, especially not for
more recent periods in prosperous countries where such offenders
were on an average found to be as healthy as non-offenders. In the
case of girl delinquents, physical over-development is often blamed
for sexual misbehaviour, and it is only natural that where their
physical precocity greatly outstrips their intellectual and emotional
maturity violations of the social and legal norms of conduct are likely
to happen. The frequency of ‘care and protection’ cases coming
before the juvenile courts, most of which are, in fact, cases of sexual
irregularity, often coupled with petty criminal offences, bears witness
to this. 70 While some American writers lay special stress on the

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

physical over-development of such girls, 71 this point is less conspicu-
ous in the scanty English material available. 72 Dr. Epps, in her survey
of a sample of Borstal girls, made between 1948 and 1950, received
the general impression of a ‘group of well-developed and physically
healthy girls’. 73 In any case, this factor seems to be less strongly
related to crime than to sexual irregularity. For women who have
passed the stage of adolescence the menstruation factor, pregnancy
and later the menopause, play a more important part. Their potential
connection with so-called kleptomania and pyromania has been dis-
cussed above (Chapter 15, 1(c)), but Gibbens, to whose study of
shop-lifting we have already referred and who found that 31 per cent
of his psychiatric shoplifters had what he terms gynaecological con-
ditions, points out that the latter ‘were not limited to severe meno-
pausal symptoms, but were distributed throughout the generative
cycle’. 74

Lack of physical strength has often been quoted as explaining the
lower female rate of offences against the person, but Poliak argues
against this that in the present age technological inventions enable
the weaker sex to be physically aggressive without possessing manual
strength, and if women are strong enough to do comparatively heavy
work in factories, shops and households, why should they not be
capable of physical aggression, too? (p. 123). It is, he concludes, the
‘cultural stereotype’, the ‘assignment of certain social roles’ rather
than their physique that reduces their use of violent methods. To
some extent this is true, but one has to bear in mind that, as Poliak
shows himself aware in other parts of his book, the average physical
inferiority of women which can hardly be denied has inevitable
psychological consequences favouring non-violent techniques. This
in conjunction with their actual lack of physical strength explains
why women prefer poisoning to other techniques of killing, or at
least try to dope the victim before resorting to violence.

Some years ago, two young London women described as ‘housewives’
were sentenced to 1 2 months’ imprisonment each at the Old Bailey. Armed
with a pad soaked in ether and a knife, they had tried to rob a chauffeur
who had given them a lift, by pressing the pad over his face (The Times,
20.1.1959). As the knife shows, they were quite prepared to kill or at
least seriously injure him after overcoming his resistance by means of
ether.

Lombroso and, following him, Sighele 75 speak of the greater
‘ferocity’ of women criminals, the latter explaining it as a consequence
of their weakness, whereas the former believes at least the ‘born
criminal’ variety to be less sensitive to pain and therefore devoid of
compassion. The superintendent of a remand home in this country,

AGE AND SEX FACTORS IN CRIME

too, finds girls just as much inclined to physical violence as boys and
just as ready to use flick-knives, for which he blames the ‘overdose of
free discipline’ in modern education (The Times, 21.10.1959).

Turning now to the typological side of the matter, we have, first of
all, further to consider Lombroso’s views on female offenders, to
which no special reference was made above in Chapter 12 in connec-
tion with our general survey of his theory. In his monograph on the
subject, 76 written jointly with his son-in-law G. Ferrero, Lombroso
stressed the comparative rarity of the born criminal type among
female offenders, only 14 per cent against 31 per cent among males.
Prostitutes, on the other hand, he believed to belong far more fre-
quently (about 38 per cent) to this type. Female offenders were mostly
occasional lawbreakers, presenting only a few characteristics of de-
generation and deviation from the biological norm. Psychologically,
Lombroso thought, women are by nature more conservative in all
matters affecting the social order, a trait which he thought to be due
to the ‘immobility of the ovule compared with the zoosperm’. To this
we shall have to return later on. Primitive woman, according to
Lombroso, was rarely a murderess, but she was always a prostitute,
and from all this he developed his theory that prostitution was the
female substitute for crime. Even without accepting these out-dated
anthropological and typological speculations we can find a great deal
of truth in his prostitution thesis. The latter docs not mean that
prostitution is ‘the sum and substance of all female criminality’ 77 in
the sense that all female crime is caused and dominated by sexual
factors— although much of it is — it merely means that in situations
which make a man turn to crime, a woman can often find another
alternative in prostitution, semi-prostitution, or at least in sexual
behaviour such as a financially dictated marriage and similarly lucra-
tive affairs. While all these alternatives open to women undoubtedly
help them as a rule to keep out of clearly criminal entanglements, in
some cases the opposite happens. To mention only one recent in-
stance, the Ward case, with all its ramifications, shows how certain
female actors in this political and social tragi-comedy, after success-
fully evading some of the pitfalls created by the criminal law, were
eventually caught in others.

(b) Psychological and Sociological Factors. The material presented
under (a) on the effect of physical factors has again clearly shown their
close connection with the psychological and sociological side of the
problem. Starting with biological characteristics Lombroso and his
followers have inevitably been driven to the discussion of psycho-
logical traits and sociological differences. The list of such traits and
differences used in the literature on female crime is impressive perhaps
more through its length than its persuasiveness; nevertheless, a

701

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

number of points have been made which are worth mentioning, if
only to see whether a coherent picture emerges from them.

It is, generally speaking, easier to produce lists of personality
differences allegedly existing between the sexes than to prove that
such differences are responsible for a higher or lower crime rate.
Nevertheless, as will be shown below, several such personality
differences have been quoted in the literature as having some effect
on crime.

Lombroso wrote of the greater, biologically conditioned, con-
servatism of women, which makes it easier for them to accept the
existing social order even where it is to their disadvantage. On the
other hand, he had to admit that their sense of property was not very
strong; in Paris, he reports, lost property was almost invariably
brought to the office by men, and shoplifting was already at that time
regarded as a typically feminine occupation, a view confirmed by the
figures for 1961 quoted above. It has to be borne in mind, however,
that shopping, too, is a typically feminine occupation, and something
is therefore to be said for the view of Gibbens and Prince that in
proportion to the total numbers of shoppers there are even more male
than female shoplifters. 78 A similar point was made by the present
writer in Social Aspects of Crime with regard to larceny by servants,
where it was pointed out that the official figures, apparently so un-
favourable to women, should be interpreted in the light of the num-
bers of existing servants of either sex, which at the time showed a
considerable predominance of females, (p. 341). Roughly at the time
when Lombroso made his point on the greater conservatism of
women the fight for their emancipation and equal rights was already
on. Alexandre Dumas junior had published his Les femmes qui tuent
et les femmes qui votent , 70 where he tried to show that women, de-
prived of any legal opportunities to air their grievances, had to resort
to crime of violence, and Gunnar Myrdal draws a parallel between
the Negro struggle for equal rights and that of women. 80 In both in-
stances resort to violence proved to be unavoidable; for the English
Suffragettes movement before the First World War a few figures have
been given in Social Aspects of Crime (p. 347) to show its impact on
criminal statistics. Another famous figure in the movement for
women’s emancipation, not less important than the real ones, Ibsen’s
Nora, committed no crime of violence but forgery in the interest of
her family. ‘It appears that a woman has no right to spare her dying
father, or to save her husband’s life! I do not believe that ... I believe
that before all else I am a human being.’ Apparently, the conservatism
of women allows for certain exceptions not only in favour of their
struggle for equality but also for the sake of their families. Women
can become rebels against established authority just as well as

'702

AGE AND SEX FACTORS IN CRIME

men and commit crimes for the sake of the values in which they
believe.

A married woman with eleven children living with her real and a
bigamous husband in the same house, was sentenced to four months’
imprisonment at Birmingham Assizes. When the Judge told her: ‘You
have set the marriage laws of the country at complete defiance, you have
made a mockery of the whole thing,’ the woman replied: ‘Did I do wrong
in doing this for my children? The children are happy.’ (The Times,
8.7.1939.) Apparently, according to her interpretation of the marriage laws
at least two husbands were required to help her to feed eleven children.

Similarly, Mary Stevenson Callcott 81 tells us that in the earlier days
of the Soviet regime the male peasants, seeing that opposition was
useless, did not resist collectivization as fiercely as was done by their
womenfolk who used to poison their cows or pigs before they were
taken from them; no vision of the perfect communist society of the
future could compensate them for the immediate loss of their prop-
erty. In short, political ideals, whether conservative or communist,
have to take second place in the female mind ; the immediate needs of
her own family come first and have to be protected if necessary by
criminal action. This more individualistic approach to life also
colours the female selection of property offences : for example women
prefer shoplifting to looting, where individual choice of the articles
is difficult, or to stealing money. Their lack of respect for abstract
ideas such as the state and its system of justice shows itself in the
greater ease with which they commit perjury. Admittedly, this is
difficult to prove statistically (sex ratio for 1961, 1 : 6-8), but practical
court experience leaves no doubt that it is true, 82

Whether there is a wider variety in the male than in the female
personality is a controversial issue; 83 men have probably produced
more extreme types than women, i.e. more geniuses, saints and
leaders, but possibly also more subnormal persons, although the
latter is far from certain (see also below). For example Murphy and
Newcomb report that as a rule sex differences in intelligence have
not been found 84 and Cyril Burt does not even mention the matter as
a general problem except for the statement that among his samples of
girls, particularly the older ones inclined towards sex delinquency,
the proportion of defectives was perceptibly higher than among the
boys. 85 On the other hand, most writers agree that there are distinct
sex differences in certain special aptitudes, attitudes and tempera-
mental traits.

Burt 83 distinguishes in his scheme of temperamental conditions the
strong or ‘sthenic’ instincts, such as anger, acquisitiveness, self-
assertiveness and sex, and the weak or ‘asthenic’ instincts, such as
tenderness, submissiveness, grief and fear, and maintains that the

703

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

first are more pronounced in males, the second more pronounced in
females, and as he regards the ‘sthenic’ instincts as chiefly responsible
for crime such differences explain in his view the lower female crime
rate. This is, however, only in part confirmed by his list in Table XVII
which shows the incidence of such instincts and emotions as major or
minor factors in his samples. The sex factor, for example, although
one of his ‘sthenic’ instincts, is far more prominent in the girls of his
delinquent sample. Whether such emotions as gregariousness or self-
assertiveness belong to the sthenic or to the asthenic instincts, there
is no doubt, however, that they are more prominent in males than in
females (see again Burt’s Table XVII). Girls do not form gangs,
although they may occasionally join them for the sake of sexual ad-
ventures, nor do they often commit their offences in company with
other females. With regard to self-assertiveness — a trait which the
Gluecks distinguish from self-assertion, whereas Burt makes no such
distinction 87 — this appears as a (minor) factor in Burt’s table far more
frequently among delinquent boys than among delinquent girls and
leads among the former to ‘feats of rivalry, daring and defiance’,
among the girls, however, to ‘vain and romantic lying’ and at a later
age to theft and immorality to obtain gay clothes, jewellery, etc.
Lying and cheating in school was observed by Hartshorne more often
in girls than in boys, but mainly because of their higher ambitions . 88
The greater deceitfulness of women is also used by Poliak to explain
their greater success in ‘masking’ their crimes; his explanation of the
prevalence of this trait is partly a biological, partly a sociological one.
Women are forced by the sex mores of our society every four weeks
to conceal their period of menstruation and to misrepresent the ‘facts
of life’ to their children; they are also forced to suppress their natural
aggressive instincts — all of which is bound to make them deceitful . 88

William Healy, who also found among his cases more female than
male liars, is inclined to blame largely the social environment for it . 00

We might add that the male-dominated character of the criminal
law, to which we referred before, has made women, except for the
natural ‘rebels’, accustomed to get ‘around’ rather than act against
the law; one might therefore even venture the paradox that in a
female-dominated legal system their crime rate would increase.
Closely connected with this, the greater capacity of women to adapt
themselves to reality and their greater elasticity and resourcefulness
have been stressed. Men trained for a specific calling find it more
difficult to adapt themselves to another occupation than their wives
who, mostly possessing no such training, are usually elastic enough
to change their life pattern . 91 Johanna C. Hudig, too, speaks of the
greater adaptability of women who resign themselves more readily
to the inevitable, who possess ‘greater pliancy and tact ’. 92 Added to

704

AGE AND SEX FACTORS IN CRIME

this, men are at a further disadvantage in having to bear heavier re-
sponsibilities towards their families and the sometimes excessive
financial demands of their wives. East quotes in this connection the
observation of a bank employee that in nine out of ten cases bank
clerks went wrong because of such demands, 83 but figures of this kind
have invariably to be treated with the greatest caution. Moreover,
criminologists have been aware of the profound changes in the social
and occupational status of women in the course of the present century.
Reference has already been made to the criminological impact of the
political movements which helped to produce these changes; now we
have to consider the impact of these developments on the female crime
rate. Since Bonger, nearly fifty years ago, expressed the view that
women were like hothouse plants, sheltered from the icy blasts of life
and therefore less criminal, 84 women have assumed new roles in the
economic and occupational life of society. The present century is not
the first period of upheaval in the occupational lives of women. 95 The
Industrial Revolution, too, deprived many of them of their previous
work in the home and forced them to enter the factory. In the twen-
tieth century it was first the two world wars that not only added
greatly to their domestic responsibilities but also turned millions of
married women into industrial workers or shop assistants, etc., and
some of them even into managers and company directors. In the
United States, with its female labour force of over 21 million in 1957,
the proportion of married women in employment increased from 30
per cent in 1940 to 54 per cent in 1957. In Britain, ‘between 1946 and
May 1955 the number of married women in gainful employment rose
by two and a quarter million to three and three quarter million or 48
per cent of all women at work’. 80

While the number of domestic servants has greatly declined, that of
female factory workers, office employees, etc., has greatly increased.
Has this led to a corresponding increase in the female crime rate for
offences connected with their employment? English official figures
again show no coherent picture. For embezzlement, where the rate
for 1932-6 was 1:46 (Assizes and Quarter Sessions) and 1:34-4 for
Magistrates’ Courts, it was, in 1961, 1 :8*8 and 1 :6 (age 21 and over)
or 1:2-2 (age 17 and under 21), which would indicate a big increase.
For false pretences and frauds (Nos. 50-3 of Criminal Statistics),
where it was 1:12 and 1:7-8 respectively before the war, it was, in
1961, 1:16 and 1:5 (21 and over) or 1:2-7 (17 and under 21). For
receiving, where it was 1 : 10-5 and 1 : 5-4 respectively, it was, in 1961,
1 :9-7 and 1:7-8 or 8-7. There is, therefore, no uniform increase, and
we should avoid hasty conclusions.

. certain other ways, however, the changed social and occupa-
tional position of women shows itself occasionally in the nature of the

ecu— o 705

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

criminal situations in which they are caught. In former days it was
one of the familiar patterns of spy trials to see more or less beautiful
women being used as baits to extract military or political secrets from
middle-aged men in high positions. Now we find a middle-aged
woman holding an influential job in a government department, draw-
ing a salary of £3,800, pleading guilty to eight counts of ‘unlawfully
communicating documents contrary to s. 2(1) of the Official Secrets
Act, 191 1’ to an official of a foreign Embassy, to whom she had
formed an attachment. She was sentenced to two years’ imprison-
ment, and the Court of Criminal Appeal, stressing in particular the
obligations of her high position, refused her application for per-
mission to appeal against this sentence, in spite of the presence of a
number of mitigating circumstances. 97 In another, less sensational,
recent case a married woman bank clerk, again of middle age, was
sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment for stealing foreign currency
and obtaining money by forgery from her employers under pressure
from her lover (The Times , 5.9.1963.) Extra-marital associations may,
criminologically speaking, cut both ways: women may be persuaded
or even forced by their lovers to steal, embezzle, defraud, receive or
kill, or they may use them to commit such offences or crimes of
violence for them. Their fairly high rate for receiving is, as Poliak
rightly says (p. 87), largely due to their traditional role in the family
as being given money for house-keeping, but also as receivers of
presents. Not surprisingly, some small sums of the money stolen in
the great train robbery of August 1963 (Chapter 25) were found in
the possession of a few women who were however found not guilty of
receiving.

Albert K. Cohen (Chapter 22 above) has tried to explain the lower
female crime rate by suggesting that women may have their own
brand of subculture which approves or disapproves conduct in ways
fundamentally different from their male counterparts, with ideals and
solutions entirely their own. 98 Their social status is largely determined
by that of their husbands, whereas the opposite is not true to the same
degree (with some notable exceptions, we might add). Consequently,
Cohen argues, their behaviour is also less determined by opposition
to the middle-class norms, with all the criminogenic dangers which
such opposition implies. He admits the so far rudimentary and over-
simplified character of his arguments which may not do full justice to
the fact that in our society women are actually among the worst
victims of the ‘status-seeking’ mania (Chapter 22 above).

Attempts, occasionally made by older writers, to use the lower
crime rate of women to prove their higher moral standards or greater
religiosity, have now been abandoned. Already Quetelet was rather
sceptical, and later on von Oettingen derided the view expressed by a

706

AGE AND SEX FACTORS IN CRIME

French writer that because women went to church five times as often
as men it was only natural that their crime rate should be only one-
fifth of the male."

Of greater significance may be the references to the high proportion
of women in mental hospitals. Already in Social Aspects (p. 343,
fn. 3) a pre-war article by Professor Penrose was mentioned, who
pointed out that in Britain, France and Germany the population of
these hospitals was rather more than half composed of females. 100
More recently, in the Report of the Royal Commission on the Law
relating to Mental Illness and Mental Deficiency 1954-7 101 the follow-
ing figures are given: Admissions to mental hospitals per 100,000
population in 1954: men, first admissions 86, second or subsequent
admissions 54. For women the corresponding figures are 108 and 74.
For mental deficiency hospitals, however, the position is reversed,
men 7 and 0-8, women 5 and 0-7. These figures do not necessarily
prove the higher incidence of mental disorders among women, but
they do show that mentally disordered women stand a better chance
than men to be admitted to mental hospitals and thereby to some
greater extent to be deprived of opportunities to commit crimes.

While women are often labelled as hysterics, there is in the psychi-
atric literature a comparative scarcity of material on women psycho-
paths, although the descriptions given of many delinquent girls
contain some of the characteristic features of the psychopathic person-
ality. There are, however, some notable exceptions. William Healy
has published several case histories of female pathological liars and

swindlers, 102 and D. K. Henderson has also produced some mater-
ial. 103 Dr. Grace W. Pailthorpe, in her pioneer study of women
prisoners at Holloway and Birmingham, has a substantial chapter on
a ‘psychopathic group’, but it seems doubtful how many of her cases
are really psychopaths and how many psychotics or neurotics. 101

Gibbens refers briefly to some cases of psychopathy among his
sample of women shoplifters, 103 and Glover, in his penetrating study
of prostitution, expresses the view that many psychopaths are prosti-
tutes and that ‘close observation of many apparently “normal”
prostitutes uncovers the existence of a number of psychopathic
traits’. 108 Might the fact of their being prostitutes perhaps often
‘mask’ the criminal activities of these psychopathic women and
thereby also help to reduce the official female crime rate ?

Better material on psychopathic women offenders tb pp in the
published case studies of psychiatrists will probably be found in
world literature. It might be interesting to analyse, for example,
Ibsen’s Hedda Gabler from this angle : is she a tragic, suffering heroine
or simply a blasSe youngish society woman, empty and bored with
life, looking desperately for distractions such as horses, butlers, fine

THE SOCIOLOGY OF CRIME

dresses and ‘interesting’ lovers, a female psychopath, in law guilty of
incitement to suicide and of wantonly destroying another person’s
property?

Lombroso’s view that women offenders are but rarely habituals is
not borne out by the facts. Even ignoring the leaders in this field, the
‘drunks’, the available English statistics give the following picture: in
the period 1952-61, the percentage of women received in prison
having six or more previous offences was between 30 and 48, while
the corresponding proportion of men was between 39 and 47. The
proportions of women entrants who were known to have served previ-
ous institutional sentences was also very high and not much lower
than that of men. 107 In accordance with the general experience, how-
ever, that the more severe a form of punishment is the less likely is it
to be used for women, the numbers of them sentenced to preventive
detention are very small, between 1950 and 1961 altogether only 68
against 2,525 men, i.e. 1 :38. 108 Their treatment in prison has been
described by Ann D. Smith, who concludes that ‘by 1961 enlightened
opinion had come to believe that the “nuisance value” of a woman
habitual criminal was not an adequate justification for society to
detain her in prison for a period which might extend to fourteen
years’ (p. 204). In fact, public opinion has not to be very enlightened
to realize this simple truth, but the pen pictures given by Tony
Parker on the B.B.C. Home Service (17.1.1963) of five such women
detainees recently discharged from Holloway may have helped to
hasten the process.

The influence of marriage on female delinquency has been briefly
discussed above in Chapter 24. Here it may merely be said that
criminal associations between husband and wife may continue for
many years. In one such case the association began when the man was
31 and the woman 17 years of age; it covered six joint convictions for
stealing, etc., over 17 years. Although the husband’s sentences were
always considerably longer, the wife was never reconvicted during his
absence, but soon after his discharge they both reappeared in court.

708

Selected Reading Lists

(see Note on p. 351)

Chapter 19

In addition to the appropriate chapters in the American textbooks listed
in Note 1 :

Lord Radcliffe, The Problem of Power, London, 1958 (Paperback).
Thorsten Selim, Culture Conflict and Crime, New York, 1938.

T. S. Eliot, Notes towards the Definition of Culture, London, 1948 (also
in Paperback).

Richard Wollheim, Socialism and Culture, London, Fabian Tract, 1961.
Gunnar Myrdal, Values in Social Theory, London, 1958.

H. Phmchi, Position and Subject-Matter of Criminology, Amsterdam, 1956.
Michael Shanks, The Stagnant Society, Harmondsworth, 1961.

T. R. Fyvel, The Insecure Offenders, London, 1961 (also in Paperback).

J. K. Galbraith, The Affluent Society, London, 6th imp. 1960 (also in
Paperback).

Hermann Mannheim, Social Aspects of Crime in England between the Wars,
London, 1940, Part 2.

Hermann Mannheim, Criminal Justice and Social Reconstruction, 2nd imp.,
London, 1949.

Richard M. Titmuss, Essays on 'The Welfare State', London, 1958, Chs.
8 - 10 .

Home Office White Paper Penal Practice in a Changing Society, H.M.S.O.
1959.

Home Office White Paper The War against Crime in England and Wales,
H.M.S.O. 1964.

Chapter 20

On Class in general:

R alf Dahrendorf, Class and Class Conflict in an Industrial Society , London
1959. ,

D. V. Glass (ed.), Social Mobility in Britain, 2nd ed., London, 1964.

T. H. Marshall, Citizenship and Social Class, Cambridge, 1950.

T. H. Marshall, Class, Citizenship and Social Development , New York,

Leonard Reissman, Class in American Society, London, 1960.

Vance Packard, The Status Seekers, London, 1960 (Paperback 1961).
Ferdynand Zweig, The Worker in an Affluent Society, London, 1962.

709

SELECTED READING LISTS

Brian Jackson and Dennis Marsden, Education and the Working Class
London, 1962.

On Imitation:

Margaret S. Wilson Vine in Pioneers in Criminology, ed. by H. Mannheim,
London, 1960, Ch. 10 on Tarde.

O. H. Mowrer, Learning Theory and Personality Dynamics, New York,
1960.

Neal E. Miller and John Dollard, Social Learning and Imitation, London,
1945.

Vance Packard, The Hidden Persuaders, London, 1957 (Paperback 1960).

On Rebels:

Albert Camus, The Rebel, London, 1953 (Paperback 1962).

Robert K. Merton, Social Theory and Social Structure, rev. ed. 1957,
Glencoe, 111., Chs. 4-5.

Tony Parker and Robert Allerton, The Courage of his Convictions, London,
1962.

On the Criminological Implications of Class:

Preben Wolf, ‘Crime and Social Class in Denmark’, Brit. J. Crim., Vol. 3,
No. 1, July 1962.

Donald R. Cressey, Other People's Money, Glencoe, HI., 1953.

Jerome Hall, Theft, Law and Society, 2nd. ed., Indianapolis, 1952, Ch. 7.

Thomas Wiirtenberger in Symposium on Aspects of Art Forgery, The
Hague, 1962.

T. C. Willett, Criminal on the Road, London, 1964, Ch. 8.

Chapter 21

Edwin H. Sutherland, White Collar Crime, New York, 1949; new ed. 1961.

Edwin H. Sutherland, in The Sutherland Papers, ed. by Albert Cohen,
Alfred Lindesmith, Karl Schuessler, Bloomington, 1956, Part 2.

Marshall B. Clinard, The Black Market, New York, 1952.

Herbert A. Bloch and Gilbert Geis, Man, Crime and Society, New York,
1962, Ch. 14.

Hermann Mannheim, Social Aspects of Crime in England between the
Wars, London, 1940, Ch. 7.

Hermann Mannheim, Criminal Justice and Social Reconstruction, 2nd
imp. 1949, London, Ch. 7.

John C. Spencer in Criminology in Transition, ed. by T. Grygier, Howard
Jones and John C. Spencer, London, 1965.

George B. Void, Theoretical Criminology, New York, 1958, Ch. 13.

Paul W. Tappan, ‘Who is the Criminal?’, Amer. Sociol. Rev., Vol. 12,
Feb. 1947.

Symposium on ‘The Ethics of Business Enterprise’, Ann. Amer. Acad.
Polit. Soc. Sci., Vol. 343, Sept. 1962.

710

SELECTED READING LISTS

Chapter 22

On Anomie:

Robert K. Merton, Social Theory and Social Structure, rev. ed. 1957, Chs. 4
and 5.

Emile Durkheim, Suicide, Eng. ed. London, 1952, Chs. 5 and 6.

Paul W. Tappan, Crime, Justice, and Correction, New York, 1960.

Burkart Holzner, ‘The Problem of Anomie and Normative Change’,
Arch.f Rechts-u. Sozialphilos., Vol. L/l, 1964, pp. 57-86.

Bernard Lander, Towards an Understanding of Juvenile Delinquency, New
York, 1954, pp. 55 ff.

Richard A. Cloward and Lloyd E. Ohlin, Delinquency and Opportunity,
Glencoe, 111., 1960, pp. 78 ff.

On Criminal Subculture:

Albert K. Cohen, Delinquent Boys: The Culture of the Gang, Glencoe, 111.,
1955, London, 1956.

William Foote Whyte, Street Corner Society, 2nd ed., Chicago, 1955.

Cloward and Ohlin (see above).

Hermann Mannheim, Criminal Justice and Social Reconstruction, Part 3.

Gresham M. Sykes and David Matza, ‘Techniques of Neutralization’,
Amer. Sociol. Rev., Vol. 22, Dec. 1957.

John B. Mays, Education and the Urban Child, Liverpool, 1962.

A. P. Jephcott and M. P. Carter, The Social Background of Delinquency,
1954 (Univ. of Nottingham, unpubl.).

T. R. Fyvel, The Insecure Offenders, London, 1961.

D. M. Downes, Delinquent Subcultures in East London, London, 1965.

John B. Mays, Growi/ig up in the City, Liverpool, 1954.

John B. Mays, Crime and the Social Structure, London, 1963.

Chapter 23

On the Ecological Theory:

T. P. Morris, The Criminal Area, London, 1958.

Clifford R. Shaw, Delinquency Areas, Chicago, 1929.

Clifford R. Shaw and Henry McKay et al., Juvenile Delinquency and
Urban Areas, Chicago, 1942.

Howard Jones, ‘Approaches to an Ecological Study’, Brit. J. Delinq., Vol.
8, No. 4, April 1958. ,

Hermann Mannheim, Juvenile Delinquency in an English Middletown,
London, 1948.

On Mobility, Immigration, Urbanization and Urbanism:

Marshall B. Clinard, Sociology of Deviant Behavior, New York, 1957,
Chs. 3, 16, 17.

Marshall B. Clinard, ‘A Cross-Cultural Replication of the Relation of
Urbanism to Criminal Behavior’, Amer. Sociol. Rev., Vol. 25, No. 2,
April 1960.

711

SELECTED READING LISTS

Donald R. Taft, Criminology, 3rd ed., New York, 1956, Ch. 8,

Thorsten Selim, Culture Conflict and Crime, New York, 1938.

Ruth Glass in Society: Problems and Methods of Study, London, 1962,
Ch. 26.

On Delinquency Areas:

Clifford R. Shaw, T. P. Morris, H. Mannheim (see books quoted above).
John C. Spencer et al., Stress and Release in an Urban Estate, London,
1964, Ch. 14.

‘Symposium on Delinquency Areas’ in Brit. J. Deling., Vol. 7, No. 2,
Oct. 1956.

On Culture Conflict and Minorities:

Thorsten Sellin (see above).

Arthur Lewis Wood, ‘Crime and Aggression in Changing Ceylon’, Trans.
Amer. Philosoph. Soc., New Series, Vo-1. 51, Part 8, Philadelphia, Dec.
1961.

Arthur Lewis Wood, ‘Minority-Group Criminality and Cultural Integra-
tion’, J. crim. Law, Criminal. Police Sci., Vol. 37, No. 6, March-April,
1947.

Hermann Mannheim, Group Problems in Crime and Punishment, London,
1955, Ch. 8.

Hans v. Hentig, Crime: Causes and Conditions, New York, 1947, Ch. 7.
W. A. Bonger, Race and Crime, New York, 1943.

Shlomo Shoham, ‘The Application of the “Culture Conflict” Hypothesis
to the Criminality of Immigrants in Israel’, J. crim. Law Criminol.
Police Sci., Vol. 53, No. 2, June 1962.

On Religion:

H. Bianchi, ‘Crime and Religious Profession’, Amsterdam, Free Univ,
Quarterly, Vol. 5, No. 1, Nov. 1957.

W. H. Nagel, ‘Criminality and Religion’, Tijdschrift voor Strafrccht, Vol.
69, No. 5, 1960.

On Economic Factors:

W. A. Bonger, Criminality and Economic Conditions, Boston. 1916.
Thorsten Sellin, Research Memorandum on Crime in the Depression, Soc.

Sci. Res. Council Bull. 27, New York, 1937.

Hermann Mannheim, Social Aspects of Crime in England between the
Wars, London, 1940, Chs. 4, 5, 7, 9, 10.

Hermann Mannheim, Criminal Justice and Social Reconstruction, Chs. 6-9.
George B. Void, Theoretical Criminology, New York, 1958, Ch. 9.

Cyril Burt, The Young Delinquent, 4th ed., 1944, Ch. 3.

Dorothy S. Thomas, Social Aspects of the Business Cycle, London, 1925.

On War:

Hermann Mannheim, War and Crime, London, 1941.

The Effect of the War on Criminality, Bull. Int. Penal and Penitent. Comm.

712

SELECTED READING LISTS

(I.P.P.C.), Vol. 15, No. 4/H of the Select Papers on Penal and Penit.
Affairs, Berne, 1951.

Marshall B. Clinard, Sociology of Deviant Behavior, New York, 1957,
Ch. 20.

Hermann Mannheim, Group Problems in Crime and Punishment, Ch. 5.

Leslie T. Wilkins, Delinquent Generations, a Home Office Research Unit
Report, London, 1960.

A. A. Walters, ‘Delinquent Generations’, Brit. J. Crim., Vol. 3, No. 4,
April 1963.

On Differential Association:

Edwin H. Sutherland and Donald R. Cressey, Principles of Criminology,
6th ed., Philadelphia, 1960, pp. 68-9.

Donald R. Cressey, Delinquency, Crime and Differential Association, The
Hague, 1964.

Sheldon Glueck in S. and E. Glueck, Ventures in Criminology, London,
1964, Ch. 16.

George B. Void, Theoretical Criminology (see above), Ch. 10.

On Mass Communications:

Kimball Young, Handbook of Social Psychology, 2nd ed., London, 1957,
Chs. 15-17.

Chapter 24

On Groups in General:

Harry M. Johnson, Sociology, London, 1961, Ch. 1.

W. J. H. Sprott, Human Groups, Harmondsworth, 1958.

On Penal Institutions:

Gresham M. Sykes, The Society of Captives, Princeton, 1958.

Hugh J. Klare, Anatomy of Prison, London, 1960 (also in Paperback).

T. and P. Morris, Penfonville, London, 1963.

John James, ‘The Application of the Small Group Concept in the Study of
the Prison Community’, Brit. J. Delinq., Vol. 5, No. 4, April 1955,

On the Family:

S. and E. Glueck, Unraveling Juvenile Delinquency, New York, 1950.

S. and E. Glueck, Family Environment and Delinquency, London, 1962.
Barbara Wootton, Social Science and Social Pathology, London, 1959,
Ch. 3.

G. R. Andry, Delinquency and Parental Pathology, London, 1960.

William and Joan McCord, The Origins of Crime, Nevv York, 1959.

D. H. Stott, Delinquency and Human Nature, Dunfermline, 1950.

On ‘Problem Families':

Harriett C. Wilson, Delinquency and Child Neglect, London, 1962.

713

SELECTED READING LISTS

John C. Spencer in Benjamin Schlcsinger (cd.), The Multi-Problem Family
Toronto, 1963.

On Marriage:

Hans v. Hentig, Crime: Causes and Conditions, New York, 1947, Ch. 11
( 13 ).

On Schools:

Sheldon Glueck, The Problem of Delinquency, Boston, 1959, Ch. 7.

Cyril Burt, The Young Delinquent, 4th ed. 1944, Ch. 4.

I. Roger Yoshino, Juvenile Delinquency and the School, in Sociology of
Crime, ed. by Joseph S. Roucek, London, 1962. '

John B. Mays, Education and the Urban Child, Liverpool, 1 962.

Chapter 25

General and Legal:

George C. Homans, The Human Group, New York and London, 1951.

W. J. H. Sprolt, Human Groups, Harmondswortb, 1958, Ch. ID.

R. T. La Piere, Collective Behavior, New York, 1938.

Glanville Williams, The Criminal Law. General Part, London, 1953, Ch. 6.

On Crowds:

Gustave Lc Bon, The Crowd, London, 1952.

Lionel Penrose, On the Objective Study of Crowd Behaviour, London, 1952.
William F. Ogburn and Meyer F. NimkolT, A Handbook of Sociology,
London, 4th cd. 1960, Ch. 10.

On Adult Gangs and Organized Crime:

Herbert A. Bloch and Gilbert Geis, Man, Crime and Society, New York,
1962, Ch. 9.

Walter C. Reckless, The Crime Problem, 3rd. cd., New York, 1961, Chs. 9,

iO.

John B. Mays, Crime and the Social Structure, London, 1963, Ch. 12.
‘Combatting Organized Crime’, cd. by Gus Tyler, Ann. Amer. Acad. Pol.
Soc. Sci., Vol. 347, May 1963.

On Adolescent Gangs:

Frederick Thrasher, The Gang, Chicago, 2nd ed., 1936.

William F. White, Street Corner Society, 2nd cd., Chicago, 1955.
Cloward-Ohlin and Albert K. Cohen (see above, Ch. 22).

Lewis Yablonsky, The Violent Gang, New York, 1962.

Peter Scott, ‘Gangs and Delinquent Groups in London’, Brit. J. Delinq.,
Vol. 7, No. 1, July 1956.

On Victimology:

Hans v. Hentig, The Criminal and his Victim, New Haven, 1948.

Terence Morris and Louis Blom-Coopcr, A Calendar of Murder, London,
1964, Ch. 7.

714

SELECTED READING LISTS

Marvin E. Wolfgang, Patterns of Homicide, Philadelphia, 1958, Parts 2
and 3.

Chapter 26

On Age:

Criminal Statistics England and Wales for 1963, London, 1964.

Howard Jones, Crime and the Penal System, 2nd ed., London, 1962, Ch. 9.
Barbara Wootton, Social Science and Social Pathology, London, 1959,
Ch. 5.

Leslie T. Wilkins, Delinquent Generations, London, H.M.S.O., 1960.
Thorsten Sellin, The Criminality of Youth, Philadelphia, 1940.

S, and E. Glueck, Later Criminal Careers, New York, 1937, Ch. 10.
Thorsten Sellin and Marvin E. Wolfgang, The Measurement of Delin-
quency, New York, 1964.

Sir George Benson, Brit. J. Delinq., Vol. 3, No. 3, Jan. 1953, and Vol. 5,
No. 2, Oct. 1954.

Hermann Mannheim, Social Aspects of Crime in England, London, 1940,
Chs. 3, 9, 10.

On Sex:

Mabel Elliott, Crime in Modern Society, New York, 1952, Chs. 8 and 9.
Otto Poliak, The Criminality of Women, Philadelphia, 1950.

Ann D. Smith, Women in Prison, London, 1962, Chs. 1 and 2.

T. C. N. Gibbens and Joyce Prince, Shoplifting, London, 1962.

(2yril Burt, The Young Delinquent, Ch. 9.

Ruth R. Morris, Brit. J. Crim., Vol. 5, 1965.

Moya Woodside, ‘Women Drinkers in Holloway Prison’, Brit. J. Crim.,
Vol. 1, 1961.

Nermann Mannheim, Social Aspects of Crime in England, London, 1940,

715

Notes

Chapter 19

1 On the sociology of crime in general see most American textbooks, notably
Taft, Sutherland-Cressey, and Mabel Elliott. Also Marshall B. Clinard, Sociology
of Deviant Behavior, Herbert A. Bloch and Gilbert Geis, Man, Crime and Society,
New York, 1962; Joseph S. Roucek (ed.), Sociology of Crime, London, 1962,
New York, 1961. Moreover, Wolf Middendorff, Soziologie des Verbrechens,
Diisseldorf-Koln, 1959.

2 Ogbum and Nimkoff, Handbook of Sociology , Ch. 24. The literature on
‘culture’ is very extensive, and reference may be made to the well-known texts on
social anthropology, sociology, and social psychology. A brief and useful dis-
cussion is given, e.g., by Joseph Gittler, Social Dynamics, New York, 1952, Part 6.

3 London, 1958, Paperback ed., Harmondsworth, 1961, pp. 16 and passim.

4 London, 1948.

8 See, e.g., recently Kathleen Nott, ‘Whose Culture?’ the Listener, 12.4.1962,
pp. 631-2.

0 Fabian Tract, 331, May 1961, pp. 16-17. See also the various comments on it
in the New Statesman, 2.6.1961.

7 On this see B. M. Spinley, The Deprived and the Privileged, London, 1953, pp.
3 ff., referring to A. Kardiner’s The Psychological Frontiers of Society.

8 Donald R. Taft, Criminology, 3rd ed., p. 28.

0 Quoted from Bonger, Introduction to Criminology, in the Eng. trans. by van
Loo, London, 1936, pp. 78-9. Lacassagne used these words on the occasion of
the First International Anthropological Congress in Rome in 1885 (see Bonger).
J. M. van Bemmelen, Criminologie, 3rd. ed., Zwolle, 1952, p. 53 fn. 3, rightly
stresses the priority of Quetelet.

10 Jacob Burckhardt’s great book was first published in 1860. Here the 12th
German edition, Leipzig, 1919, is referred to, where the material on crime in the
Italian Renaissance appears in Section 6.

11 London, 2 vols, 1873-6.

12 London, 4 vols., 1861 flf.

13 F. C. Av£-Lallement, Das deutsche Gamertum in seiner sozialpolitischen,
literarischen and linguistischen Ausbildung zu seinem hcutigen Bestand, 3 vols.,
1858-62.

14 Stuttgart, 1951.

18 On the interesting subject of the Gaunersprache see, in addition to Ave-
Lallemant, Hans Gross, Handbuch fiir Untersuchungsrichter, 7th ed., 1922, Part
1, Section 8 ; Jean Graven, L' Argot et le Tatouage des Criminals. Etude de Crimino-
logie sociale, Neuchatel, 1962; on modem American Prison slang Donald Clem-
mer. The Prison Community, App. B, and Gresham M. Sykes, The Society of
Captives, Princeton, 1958, Ch. 5.

18 Walter Goldschmidt, Understanding Human Society, London, 1959, p. 73.

17 Gordon Trasler, The Explanation of Criminality, p. 65.

716

NOTES TO PAGES 424-440

18 Hariy M. Johnson, Sociology , New York-London, 1961, pp. 50, 87.

18 Murphy and Newcomb, Experimental Social Psychology, p. 199.

50 Gunnar Myrdal, Value in Social Theory, p. 77.

21 H. Bianchi, Position and Subject-Matter of Criminology, Amsterdam, 1956,
pp. 129 ff.

22 Thorsten Sellin, Culture Conflict and Crime, pp. 28-9.

23 Gordon Trasler, op. cit., p. 66. On attitudes see also Muzafer and Carolyn
W. Sherif, Outline of Social Psychology, rev. ed., New York, 1956, Ch. 15 and
pp. 173 ff.; D. R. Price-Williams, Introductory Psychology, London, 1958, pp.
60 ff.; Murphy and Newcomb, Experimental Social Psychology, esp. Ch. 13.

24 See, e.g., Murphy and Newcomb, op. cit., p. 936.

25 Ibid., pp. 946 ff.

26 Trasler, op. cit., p. 103. On the whole subject of changing attitudes see also
Group Problems, p. 17.

27 R. B. Cattell, Introduction to Personality Study, London, 1950, p. 20.

28 Tawney, op. cit., London, 1921, also available in Paperback ed.; Galbraith,
op. cit., 6th imp. London, 1960 ; Titmuss : Fabian Tract 323 ; Shanks, The Stagnant
Society; Fyvel, The Insecure Offenders, London, 1961. More recently Nicholas
Davenport, The Split Society, London, 1964.

28 David C. McClelland, The Achieving Society, Princeton, 1961.

20 Lord Radcliffe, The Problem of Power, London, 1958, pp. 118 ff. ‘The Post-
script’ was separately reprinted in The Times.

31 See my contribution in Law and Opinion in England in the Twentieth Century,
ed. by Morris Ginsberg, London, 1959, pp. 264 ff.

32 On these developments see Richard M. Titmuss, Essays on ‘ The Welfare
State', London, 1958, Ch. 8-10; the same, in Law and Opinion in England in the
Twentieth Century, pp. 299 ff

33 Evening Standard, 12.4.1960.

34 Titmuss, Essays, Ch. 2, and now in greater detail in Income Distribution and
Social Change, London, 1962.

38 Durkheim, Division of Labour.

38 Audrey Harvey, Casualties of the Welfare State, London, Fabian Tract 321,
Feb. 1960; Peter Townsend, ‘The Meaning of Poverty’, New Statesman, 20.4,1962,
pp. 553-4. Also Shanks, The Stagnant Society, p. 184: ‘The British Welfare State
tends to spread its benefits too widely and too thinly, so that not enough is
available to help those whose need is greatest.’ ‘Our Welfare Services’, he thinks,
‘have begun to fall disturbingly behind those in many countries on the Con-
tinent and elsewhere.’

^ J.K. Galbraith, The Affluent Society, London, 6th imp. 1 960 (also Paperback),

38 See my Criminal Justice, p. 101, fn, 2, and Samuel Brittan in the Observer,
8.4.1962.

88 See also Richard A. Cloward and Lloyd E. Ohlin, Delinquency and Oppor-
tunity, Glencoe, 111,, 1960, and London, 1962, pp. 84-5.

40 Social Aspects of Crime, p. 125.

41 Report of a Committee to Inquire into the Operation of the Dock Workers
( Regulation of Employment ) Scheme, 1947, H.M.S.O., July 1956, Cmd. 9813, pp.
15 ff Meanwhile the trouble at the Docks has apparently become even worse,
and another Devlin Report is eagerly awaited.

43 London, 1961 .

43 See Criminal Justice and Social Reconstruction, pp . 152 ff, for the time up to
the end of the Second World War; Wolfgang Friedmann, Law in a Changing
Society, London, 1959, Ch. 8.

717

NOTES TO PAGES 441-447

** 0a the issues involved in one of these battles see Hansard of the 14 2 1962
cols. 1329-1448. ' ' ’

45 Sir Norman Angell, The Unseen Assassins, London, p. 176, fn. 1.

46 Shanks, op. cit., pp. 155 ff.; Titmuss, Essays, Ch. 6, esp. pp. 110 ff.

47 See, e.g., John H. Goldthorpe, ‘Organization and Supervisor-Worker Con-
flict’, Brit. J. Sociol., Vol. 10, No. 3, Sept. 1959, pp. 213 ff. (referring to the
Mining Industry); J. A. C. Brown, Industrial Psychology, Harmondsworth, 1954.

48 The Listener, 5.7.1962 and subsequent weeks; The Times, 17.7.1962 and sub-
sequently.

Chapter 20

1 On social class and class conflict the following non-criminological works may
be consulted: Ralf Dahrendorf, Class and Class Conflict in an Industrial Society,
London, 1959 (with comprehensive bibliog.). To this important book the present
writer is particularly indebted, although he is not in complete agreement with
some of the author’s views. Moreover: L. A. Coser, The Functions of Social Con-
flict, London, 1956; D. V. Glass (ed.), Social Mobility in Britain, London, 1954,
2nd ed. 1964; T. H. Marshall, Citizenship and Social Class, Cambridge, 1950; H.
M. Johnson {op. cit. above at Ch. 19, N. 18); David Riesman et al.. The Lonely
Crowd, New Haven, 1950, and abridged by the authors, New York, 1953;
Leonard Reissman, Class in American Society, London, 1960; Vance Packard,
The Status Seekers, London, 1960, Harmondsworth, 1961; C. Wright Mills,
White Collar, New York, 1956; Andrew Grant, Socialism and the Middle Classes,
London, 1954; T. S. Simey, ‘Class Conflict and Social Mobility’,/, roy. Soc. Arts,
Vol. 104, No. 4987, 28.9.1956, pp. 839 ff.; Richard Centers, The Psychology of
Social Class, Princeton, 1949; H. J. Eysenck, The Psychology of Politics, London,
1954; Richard Hoggart, The Uses of Literacy, London, 1957, and Harmonds-
worth, 1958; Ferdynand Zweig, The Worker in an Affluent Society, London, 1962;
Peter Collison, The Cutteslowe Walls, A Study in Social Class, London, 1963.

Popular: John Coleman, ‘Class and the English’, Sunday Times, 9.7.1961;
Peter Laslett, ‘Social Change in England 1901-51’, ihc Listener, 4.1 and 11.1.1962.

2 On the following see esp. Dahrendorf, op. cit., passim.

3 Sir Isaiah Berlin, Historical Inevitability, London, 1954.

4 Dahrendorf, op. cit., pp. 41 ff., who partly accepts, partly supplements and
partly rejects and refute’s Marx’s theory of class,

5 Pp. 48 ff.

6 See, e.g., Preben Wolf, ‘Crime and Social Class in Denmark’, Bril. J. Crim.,
Vol. 3, No. 1, July 1962, pp. 5 ff, referring to Svalastoga.

7 Status Seekers, pp. 41 ff

8 See the valuable contributions by Basil Bernstein on language and class in
Brit. J. Sociol, Vol. 9, 1958, pp. 159-74, Vol. 10, 1959, pp. 31 1-26, Vol. 1 1 , 1960,
pp. 271 ff. Adherence to a certain political party is no longer a safe guide to
social class in Britain as many working-class people vote Conservative and many
middle-class people vote Labour; see the statistics given by Richard Rose, The
Times, 12.10.1964.

0 Trasler, The Explanation of Criminality, pp. 75 ff

10 Murray A. Straus, ‘Deferred Gratification, Social Class, and the Achieve-
ment Syndrome’, Amer. Sociol. Rev., Vol. 27, No. 3, June 1962, pp. 326 ff, with
many references.

11 Straus, e.g., concludes that, although his research in Wisconsin had provided
some evidence for a general pattern of this kind, it seemed ‘one of the personality
requisites for achievement roles in contemporary American society’ rather than a
peculiar middle-class pattern.

718

NOTES TO PAGES 447-458

13 ‘The Social Background of Delinquency’, The University of Nottingham,
1954 (unpublished), pp. 153, 275 ff.

13 See also Zweig, op. cit., pp. 104, 108.

14 The New Society, No. 3, 18.10.1962, pp. 18-19.

16 Eysenck, op. cit., p. 14.

16 Zweig, op. cit.. Part 6.

17 Brit. J. Sociol., Vol. 5, No. 4, Dec. 1954, p. 371.

18 Packard, op. cit., p. 286.

» Ibid., Ch. 20.

20 London, 1957.

21 A survey by the Institute of Community Studies, London, 1962.

38 Paperback ed., pp. 241 ff.

23 In the meantime, the Report on Higher Education (Robbins Report),
H.M.S.O., London, Oct. 1963, Cmd. 2154, has added some further information
on the subject. Its table 21 (p. 5) shows the ‘Percentage of Children bom in
1940-1 reaching by 1960/1 full time Higher Education’, by father’s occupation
(Great Britain). From the figures presented the Report concludes: ‘Our survey
confirmed that the' association with parental occupation is, if anything, still
closer (than according to the Crowther Report) where higher education is con-
cerned’, and (p. 52) ‘There is impressive evidence that large numbers of able
young people do not at present enter higher education’. Moreover, ‘Children of
manual workers are on average much less successful than children of the same
ability in other social groups . . .’

34 Report of the Central Advisory Council for Education {England): 15-18, Vol. 1,
H.M.S.O., London, 1959, Vol. 2, 1960.

35 See, e.g., the letters in the New Statesman following the review of the book
in the issue of 12.2.1962.

28 Social Aspects of Crime, pp. 153 ff.

37 On imitation in general see, e.g., Murphy and Newcomb, Experimental
Social Psychology, pp. 180 ff.; O. H. Mowrer, Learning Theory and Personality
Dynamics, New York, 1950, pp. 573 ff.; Gordon W. Allport, Personality, New
York, 1937; William McDougall, Introduction to Social Psychology, 29th ed,, pp.
87, 280 ff; Neal E. Miller and John Dollard, Social Learning and Imitation,
London, 1945.

28 Gabriel Tarde, Les lois d'imitation, Eng. trans. by E. Parsons, New York,
1903. On Tarde see Margaret S. Wilson Vine in Pioneers in Criminology, Ch. 10,
esp. p. 231.

33 Allport, op. cit., p. 155.

30 On identification from the psychoanalytical point of view see Glover,
Psychoanalysis, p. 86; from the sociological point of view Merton, Social Theory
and Social Structure, p. 302.

31 Vance Packard, The Hidden Persuaders, Paperback ed., pp. 105, 115.

1962 "^° n y ^ ar ^" er R°b el 4 Allerton, The Courage of his Convictions, London,

33 Eng. trans., The Rebel, London, 1 953, here quoted from Paperback ed. (trans.
by Anthony Bower), Harmondsworth.

34 See, e.g., Walter Reckless, The CrimeProblem, Ch. 18; Clinard, The Sociology
of Deviant Behavior, pp. 98-9; A. Vexliard, Le Clochard, Paris, 1957, with com-
prehensive bibliog.

35 Richard Hare, Maxim Gorki, London, 1962, Ch. 3.

83 Typical of this is Francis Williams’s (now Lord Francis Williams) The
American Invasion, London, 1962, and the discussion in the Sunday Times .
8.4.1962, Colour Section.

719

NOTES TO PAGES 458-466

s? Daniel J. Boorstin, The Image — or What Happened to the American Dream.
London, 1962, Harmondsworth, 1963.

38 Clancy Sigal, the Listener, 10.5.1962, p. 822.

55 See my Preface to Pioneers in Criminology and Ch. 8 of Group Problems in
Crime and Punishment.

40 Quoted by A. Schonke, Strafgesetzbuch Kommentar, 4th ed., Miinchen-
Berlin, 1949, § 130 II,

41 So one of the leading commentators of the Penal Code, Eduard Drcher, In
Schwarz-Drehcr, Note 3 A to § 130. Also the Official Motives of the Draft Code
of 1960, § 298, Bonn, 1960, p. 435.

42 Kenny-Turner, Outlines of Criminal Law, 1952 ed., § 426.

43 See the table in Handworterbuch dcr Kriminologie, Vol. 2, pp. 48-9, which is
now probably somewhat out of date.

44 See Note 6 above.

45 On this see also my Criminal Justice and Social Reconstruction, Ch. 6 ff.

4C Marshall B. Clinard, Sociology of Deviant Behavior, pp. 23-4.

47 William M. Kephart, Amer. Soc. Rev., Vol. 19, August 1954, pp. 462 ff.

48 See, e.g., the case of a former M.P. sentenced to four years’ imprisonment
for homosexual offences as reported in The Times, 18.7.1962.

49 Roger G. Hood, Sentencing in Magistrates' Courts, The Library of Crimin-
ology, Vol. 7, London, 1962, Ch. 5, csp. pp. 81, 89, 92.

80 Terence Morris, The Criminal Area, London, 1957, Ch. 10.

61 Austin L. Porterfield, Youth in Trouble, Fort Worth, 1946.

82 G. M. Trevelyan, English Social History, London, 1942, pp. 22 ff.

83 Geschichte des Verbrcchens, Ch. 18.

84 Sexual Offenders, Eng. Stud. crim. Sci., Vol. 9, London, 1957, pp. 122 ff.

86 J. H. Fitch, Brit. J. Crim., Vol. 3, No. 1, July 1962, pp. 18-37.

88 From the large literature on changes in attitudes towards sex and on the in-
fluence of class see, e.g., Packard, The Status Seekers, Ch. 11 ; Richard Hoggart,
The Uses of Literacy, Chs. 2, 3.

87 Some of these questions are discussed by Albert J. Reiss in the symposium
on Sex Offences, Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 25, No. 2, Spring 1960,
pp. 309 ff.

88 Thomas Wiirtenberger, Das Kunstfalschertum, Weimar, 1940; Der Kampf
gegen das Kunstfalschertum in dcr deutschen und schweizerischen Strafrechtspflege,
Wiesbaden, 1951 ; Symposium on Aspects of Art Forgery, The Hague, 1962.

88 Wiirtenberger (1951), pp. 32 ff.

00 On defalcation by solicitors see Social Aspects of Crime, p. 209.

01 Other People's Money, 1953. Sutherland also regards embezzlement as
‘white collar crime’; White Collar Crime, New York, 1949, p. 231.

62 Theft, Law and Society, 2nd ed., Indianapolis, 1952, Ch. 7.

83 T. C. N. Gibbens and Joyce Prince, Shoplifting, London, 1962, p. 116.

04 On this and on motor car stealing in general see T. C. N. Gibbens, Brit. J.
Deling., Vol. 8, No. 4, April 1958, pp. 257 ff.; W. W: Wattenberg and J. Balis-
tieri, Amer. J. Sociol., Vol. 57, No. 5, May 1952, pp. 575-9; Leonard D. Savitz,
/. crim. law, Crimnol. Police Sci., Vol. 50, No. 2, July-August 1959,pp. 132 ff.
(with bibliog.); Bloch and Geis, Man, Crime and Society, pp. 332-5.

05 Social Science and Social Pathology, London, 1959, p. 26.

68 Criminal Justice and Social Reconstruction, 1946, p. 57.

67 See, e.g., the references in my contribution to Society, ed. by A. T. Welford
et al., London, 1962, pp. 293-4.

88 London, 1964, International Library of Criminology, Vol. 12.

49 Ferdynand Zweig, The Worker in an Affluent Society , London, 1 961 , p. 104.

720

NOTES TO PAGES 467-474

70 Wolf Middendorff Soziologie des Verbrechens, Diisseldorf-Koln, 1959, p.
161 ; the same, 600 Alkoholtater, Hamburg, 1961, pp. 25-6,

Chapter 21

1 Literature on White Collar Crime: Edwin H. Sutherland, White Collar Crime,
New York, 1949; new ed. 1961 ; the same in The Sutherland Papers, ed. by Albert
Cohen, Alfred Lindesmith, Karl Schuessler, Bloomington, 1956, Part 2; the
same in Ann. Atner. Acad. Polit. Soc. Sci., Vol. 217, Sept. 1941, pp. 112 If.;
Marshall B. Clinard, The Black Market, New York, 1952; Herbert A. Bloch and
Gilbert Geis, Man, Crime and Society, New York, 1962, Ch. 14; Gilbert Geis,
‘Towards a Delineation of White Collar Offences’, Sociol. Inquiry, Vol. 32, No. 2,
Spring 1962, pp. 160-71 ; Hermann Mannheim, Social Aspects of Crime, London,
1940, Ch. 7; the same, Criminal Justice and Social Reconstruction, London, 1946,
Ch. 7; the same, War and Crime, London, 1941, pp. 42 IT.; Howard Jones, Crime
and the Penal System, London, 1956, 2nd ed., 1962, pp. 6-9; Paul W. Tappan,
‘Who is the Criminal?’ Amer. Sociol. Rev., Vol. 12, Feb. 1947, pp. 96-102; John
C. Spencer, ‘White Collar Crime’, in Criminology in Transition, ed. by T. Grygier,
H. Jones, and John Spencer, International Library of Criminology, Vol. 14,
London, 1965; Donald J. Newman, 'White Collar Crime’, Crime and Correction,
Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 23, No. 4, Autumn 1958, pp. 635-753;
Frank E. Hartung, the same number, pp. 722 ff; George B. Void, Theoretical
Criminology, New York, 1958, Ch. 13; Robert G. Caldwell, Federal Probation,
March 1958, pp. 30-6. Of considerable interest are also the various contributions
to the symposium on ‘The Ethics of Business Enterprise’, Ann. Amer. Acad. Polit.
Soc. Sci., Vol. 343, Sept. 1962. Of contributions written in a foreign language see
the outstanding contribution by O. Terstegcn in the symposium Strafrechtspflege
und Strafrechtsreform, Bundeskriminalamt Wiesbaden, 1961, pp. 81-118 (with
full Bibliog.), and W. Zirpins and O. Terstegen, Wirtschaftskriminalitdt, Liibeck,
1963; also Wolf Middendorff, Soziologie des Verbrechens (cited at Ch. 20, note
70), pp. 51 ff.

I This is not the place to embark on a discussion of the legal concept of political
crime which has been very controversial in Continental literature. According to
the prevailing objective theory it depends on the nature of the values attacked by
the offender; according to the subjective theory on his motives. In the above-
mentioned case the value attacked was the existing class structure of the society
in which the offender lived. It is doubtful whether this would satisfy the objective
theory.

3 Robert K. Merton, Social Theory and Social Structure, 1957 ed., pp. 142-4.

4 On these cases see Ann. Amer. Acad. Polit. Soc. Sci., Sept. 1962, pp. 77 ff.,
115; Geis-Bloch, op. cit., p. 390; Geis, op. cit., pp. 166 ff.

5 White Collar Crime , p. 9.

* Roger Wilson, Difficult Housing Estates, London, 1 963, p. 1 8, no w makes the
same point.

7 Tappan {Joe. cit. at note 1).

8 Group Problems, p. 193.

* See esp. Criminal Justice and Social Reconstruction, Sects. Ill and IV.

10 L. C. B. Gower in Law and Opinion in England, ed. by Morris Ginsberg,
London, 1959, p. 145.

II White Collar Crime, pp. 10-11.

17 C. Wright Mills, White Collar, New York, 1951, also in Paperback ed..
New York, 1956, pp. ix-x and passim.

13 See also Terstegen, op. cit., p. 82.

C C U— X 721

NOTES TO PAGES 475-500

14 White Collar Crime, Ch. 9.

16 Frederick K. Beutel, Some Potentialities of Experimental Jurisprudence as a
New Branch of Social Science, Lincoln, 1957, pp. 257 ff.

18 Wolfgang Friedmann, Law in a Changing Society, p. 263.

17 White Collar Crime, p .6.

18 The Sutherland Papers, p. 96 (from an unpublished paper of 1948 on ‘Crime
of Corporations’).

10 See my War and Crime, p. 44.

ao Donald R. Cressey, Pacific Sociol. Rev., Vol. 3, No. 2, Autumn 1960, pp.
52-3.

91 Ernest W. Burgess, Amer. J. Sociol., Vol. 56, July 1950, pp. 32-4.

99 Void, Theoretical Criminology (cited at note 1), pp. 283 ff,

53 ‘Criminal Law and Penology’, in Law and Public Opinion in England in the
Twentieth Century, p. 283.

94 Bloch and Geis, op. cit., p. 385; Geis, op. cit., pp. 160 ff.

26 On this see Glanville Williams, Criminal Law, The General Part, Ch. 22;
Wolfgang Friedmann, op. cit., pp. 192 ff.

98 See Williams, op. cit., pp. 217-18; Friedmann, op. cit., pp. 194-5, quoting
the Tentative Draft No. 4 (1955) of the Model Penal Code of the American Law
Institute.

97 Editorial in J. Business Law, Oct. 1959, p. 309.

98 See, e.g., The Times of 15.6., 16.6., 28.6., and July 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 14, 15, 19,
20, 21, 22, 23, 1960. Also the ‘Proceedings at the Registrar’s Court of the City of
London Magistrates’, The Times, 2.2 and 2.4.1960. Moreover Spencer, loc. cit.,
p. 250, and the official report by Neville Faulks, Q.C. Investigation into the
Affairs of H. Jasper and Co., Ltd., Board of Trade, H.M.S.O., London, 1961.

99 According to press reports the shareholders of the State Building Society have
now received full capital repayments, and it is hoped to repay also full interest.

30 Cairns, ‘Monopolies and Restrictive Practices’, in Law and Opinion in
England (cited at note 23), pp. 173-92; Spencer {op. cit. at note 1); Clay, ‘The
Problem of Monopoly, The Times, 19 and 20.1.1951; Wragg, ‘The Work of the
British Restrictive Practices Court since 1958’, Amer. J. comp. Law, Vol. 10. No.
4, Autumn 1961, pp. 393 ff

81 Report of the Monopolies and Restrictive Practices Commission, H.M.S.O.,
June, 1955, Cmd. 9504.

39 Abe Fortas, ‘America’s Electrical Price Conspiracy’, The Oxford Lawyer,
Vol. 5, No. 3, Michaelmas 1962, pp. 29-32; R. A. Smith in Wolfgang, Savitz and
Johnston, The Sociology of Crime, New York, 1962, pp. 357 ff. (reprinted from
Fortune).

33 £10m. damages were awarded in June 1964 {The Times, 3.6.1964).

34 Richard Titmuss in the New Statesman, 31.8.1962, and in his book Income
Distribution and Social Change, London, 1962.

85 London, 1961, and Paperback ed. Harmondsworth, 1963.

38 On this see my Social Aspects of Crime, pp. 201 ff.

37 Sherman Adams, First-Hand Report, New York, 1961, pp. 439 ff

38 J. Hall and D. Caradog Jones, Brit. J. Sociol., Vol. 1, 1950, pp. 31-55.

33 R. Beermann, ‘The Parasite Law in the Soviet Union’, Brit. J. Crim., Vol. 3,
No. 1, July 1962, pp. 71 ff.

Chapter 22

1 Morris Ginsberg, Studies in Sociology, London, 1932, see also Dahrendorf
(on. cit. at note 1 to Ch. 20), p. 180.

722

NOTES TO PAGES 500-517

* See the quotation in my Criminal Justice and Social Reconstruction, p. 107,
and Ch. 2, above.

3 See Thorsten Sellin, in Pioneers in Criminology, pp. 289-90.

I Social Theory and Social Structure, rev. ed., Glencoe, 111., 1957, p. 135, fn. 6.

5 Emile Durkheim, Suicide, Eng. ed., London, 1952, pp. 246 ff. (trans. by John
A. Spaulding and George Simpson).

6 Suicide, p. 246.

7 Suicide, pp. 355 ff. On the relationship between homicide and suicide, see also
Ch. 16 under 4.

8 Chs. 4 and 5.

8 Deryck Cooke, Mahler 1860-1911, London, 1960, p. 13.

10 This contrast between Durkheim’s and Merton’s theory of anomie is also
stressed by Ohlin and Cloward (op. cit. at note 22 below), pp. 78 ff.

II On the concept of values or valuations and their relationship to the norms
of society, see above, Ch. 19.

13 Paul W. Tappan, Crime, Justice, and Correction, New York, 1960, pp. 169 ff.

13 See Ch. 8 on Gambling in the author’s Social Aspects of Crime in England
between the Wars, esp. pp. 216 ff.

14 Herbert A. Bloch and Gilbert Geis, Man, Crime and Society, New York,
1962, pp. 133-4.

15 Bernhard Lander, Towards an Understanding of Juvenile Delinquency, New
York, 1954, esp. Ch. 5.

10 Glencoe, 111., 1955; Eng. ed., London, 1956.

17 Hermann Mannheim, ‘Juvenile Delinquency’, Brit. J. Sociol., Vol. 7, No. 2,
June 1956, pp. 148 ff.; Merton, op. cit., p. 178.

18 William Foote Whyte, Street Corner Society, 2nd ed., Chicago, 1955.
Cohen had to use the first edition of 1943.

18 See, e.g., William F. Ogburn and Meyer F. Nimkoff, A Handbook of Socio-
logy, lsted., London, 1947, p. 139; Joseph B, Gittler, Social Dynamics, New York,
1952, pp. 237 ff. ; Marshall B. Clinard, Sociology of Deviant Behavior, New York,
1957, pp. 9-10.

30 Gordon Trasler, ‘Strategic Problems in the Study of Criminal Behavior’,
Brit. J. Crim., Vol. 4, No. 5, July 1964, pp. 422-42.

31 On this see John I. Kitsuse and D. C. Dietrick, Amer. Sociol. Rev., Vol. 24,
No. 2, April 1959, pp. 208 ff.

33 Richard A. Cloward and Lloyd E. Ohlin, Delinquency and Opportunity,
Glencoe, 111., 1960, Eng. ed., London, 1961. See Toby in Brit. J. Sociol., Vol. 12,
1961, pp. 282 ff, and my review, Brit. J. Crim., Vol. 3, No. 1, July 1962, pp. 91-3.

33 Herbert Bloch and Arthur Niederhoffer, The Gang: A Study of Adolescent
Behavior, New York, 1958. Against them Cloward and Ohlin, op. cit., pp. 54 ff.

34 Ann. Amer. Acad. Pol. Soc. Sci., Vol. 347, May 1963, pp. 20-9.

35 Dahrendorf (op. cit. above, at Ch. 20, note 1), pp. 280; Hoggart, op. cit. at
Ch. 20, note 1), Ch. 3.

38 Criminal Justice and Social Reconstruction, § 3.

37 Group Problems in Crime and Punishment, p. 21, and above, Ch. 8, text to
note 40.

38 Gresham M. Sykes and David Matza, ‘Techniques of Neutralization: A
Theory of Delinquency’, Amer. Sociol. Rev., Vol. 22, Dec. 1957, pp. 664-70.

^J°hn Barron Mays, Education and the Urban Child, Liverpool, 1962,

30 David J. Bordua, ‘Delinquent Subcultures: Sociological Interpretations of
Gang Delinquency’, Ann. Amer. Acad. Pol. Soc. Sci., Vol. 338, Nov. 1961, pp.
120 ff

NOTES TO PAGES 519-532

31 Merton, op. tit., pp. 72-81, 194-4; Daniel Bell, ‘Crime as an American Way
of Life’, Antioch Rev., Vol. 13, 1953, pp. 131-54 (reprinted in The Sociology of
Crime and Delinquency, ed. by Wolfgang, Savitz and Johnston, New York-
London, 1962, pp. 213-25); W. F. Whyte ( op . cit. at note 18), esp. Part 3.

3z Talcott Parsons, Psychiatry, Vol. 10, May 1947, pp. 167-81; Essays in
Sociological Theory, 1954 ed., Glencoe, 111., pp. 304-5; Amer. Social. Rev., Vol.
7, 1942, pp. 604-16; Cohen, op. cit., pp. 162 ff. ; Cloward-Ohlin, op. cit., pp. 48 ff.

33 Parsons uses a rather narrow concept of aggression.

34 Sheldon and Eleanor Glueck, Unraveling Juvenile Delinquency, p. 30; R. G.
Andry, Delinquency and Parental Pathology, London, 1960, pp. 12-13.

36 Shlomo Shoham, ‘Conflict Situations and Delinquent Solutions’, J. soc.
Psychol., 1964, pp. 185-215; David Matza and Gresham M. Sykes, Amer. Social.
Rev., Vol. 26, 1967, pp. 217 ff.

30 Ralph W. England, Jr., ‘Middle-Class Juvenile Delinquency’, J. crim. Law
Criminol. Police Sci., Vol. 50, March-April 1960, pp. 535-40.

37 Walter B. Miller, ‘Lower Class Culture as a Generating Milieu of Gang
Delinquency’, J. soc. Issues, Vol. 14, 1958, pp. 5-19, reprinted in Wolfgang et al.
(cited at note 31), pp 267-76. On this see also Martin Gold, Status Forces in Del.
Boys, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1963.

39 See the details in Brit. J. Crim., Vol. 1, April 1961, p. 376, Vol. 3, Jan. 1963,
p. 283 ; and in particular, Wolfgang and Ferracuti, Vol. 3, April 1963, pp. 377-88.

39 Planned by Shlomo Shoham.

40 A. P. Jephcott and M. P. Carter (under the direction of Prof. W. J. H.
Sprott, University of Nottingham, Rockefeller Research), ‘The Social Background
of Delinquency’ (privately circulated, 1954, unpublished); J. B. Mays, Growing up
in the City, 1954; the same, On the Threshold of Delinquency, 1959; the same,
Education and the Urban Child, 1962 (all three published in Liverpool); the same,
Brit. J. Crim., Vol. 3, Jan. 1963, pp. 216-30; T. P. Morris (op. cit. at note 50
to Ch. 20); T. R. Fyvel (op. cit. at note 28 to Ch. 19).

41 See my review in Brit. J. Delinq., Vol. 5, No. 4, April 1955, pp. 307-8.

42 See, however, Morris, op. cit., pp. 104-5.

43 The Uses of Literacy, p. 62.

44 Howard J., Vol. 8, No. 4, 1953, pp. 167 ff.

45 See the quotation above text to note 29.

46 ‘Delinquency Areas — A Re-assessment’ in Brit. J. Crim., Vol. 3, No. 3,
Jan. 1963, pp. 216-30.

47 John B. Mays, Crime and the Social Structure, London, 1963.

48 E.g., Growing up in the City, p. 91 ; On the Threshold, p. 165.

Chapter 23

1 On human ecology in general : see Amos H. Hawley, Human Ecology, New
York, 1950. On social ecology: M. A. Alihan, Social Ecology, New York, 1938;
Radhakamal Mukerjee, Social Ecology, London, 1942 or 1944?

On the ecological theory of crime and delinquency: see in particular T. P.
Morris, The Criminal Area (cited at note 50 to Ch. 20); Clifford R. Shaw,
Delinquency Areas, Chicago, 1929; Clifford R. Shaw and Henry McKay et al,
Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas, Chicago, 1942; Walter C. Reckless,
Criminal Behavior, New York, 1940, Ch. 4, 5; Pitirim A. Sorokin, Carle C.
Zimmermann and Charles J. Galpin, A Systematic Source Book in Rural Sociology,
Vol. 2, Minneapolis, 1931, pp. 266 ff.; also Sorokin and Zimmermann, Principles
of Rural-Urban Sociology, New York, 1929; Barnes and Teeters, Hew Horizons
in Criminology, Ch. 7; Cyril Burt, The Young Delinquent, pp. 70-8; Howard

NOTES TO PAGES 532-535

Jones, Crime and the Penal System, pp. 79-86; the same, 'Approaches to an
Ecological Study’, Brit. /. Delinq., Vol. 8, No. 4, April 1958, pp. 277-93 (on
Leicester); Her mann Mannheim, Juvenile Delinquency in an English Middletown,
London, 1948 (on Cambridge); ‘Delinquency Areas: A symposium’, Brit. J.
Delinq., Vol. 7, No. 2, Oft. 1956, pp. 137-48; Solomon Kobrin, ‘The Conflict of
Values in Delinquency Areas’, Amer. Social. Rev., Vol. 16, Oct. 1951, pp.

653- 61; the same, ‘The Chicago Area Project— a 25-year Assessment’, Ann.
Amer. Pol. Soc. Sci., Vol. 322, March 1959, pp. 19-29; Calvin F. Schmid, ‘Urban
Crime Areas’, Amer. Social, iters, Vol. 25, lS>6b, pp. 527 5., 555 S', (on Seattle) ;
W. H. Nagel, De Criminaliteit van Oss, The Hague, 1949 (in Dutch, with English
summary); Hassan Ei-Saaty, ‘Juvenile Delinquency in Egypt’ (unpublished,
London, Ph.D. Thesis, 1946); Sozialgeographische Karten. Herausgegeben vom
Hauptamt fur Gesamtplanung. Magistrat von Gross-Berlin, 1950; H. van Rooy,
Criminologische Contrasten tussenstad en land, Nijmegen, 1947; van Bemmelen,
Kriminologie, Ch. 7. The University of Utrecht, under the leadership of W. P. J.
Pompe, has in the past 25 years produced a considerable number of monographs
on the criminality of various Dutch cities and provinces. The first of them was
G. Th. Kempe and J. Vermaat, Criminaliteit in Drenthe, Utrecht, 1938. See also
Kempe in Bonger, Inleiding, 3rd ed., p. 19. Irving Spergel, Raclcetvill, Slumtown,
Haulburg, Chicago, 1963.

On Urbanization and Urbanism as Criminogenic Factors: Marshall B.
Clinard, Sociology of Deviant Behavior, New York, 1957, Ch. 3; also in several
papers, esp. ‘A Cross-Cultural Replication of the Relation of Urbanism to
Criminal Behavior’, Amer. Social. Rev., Vol. 25, No. 2, April 1960, pp. 253-7;
Bloch and Geis, op. cit ., pp. 183-5; Howard Jones, ‘The Rural Offender in
England’, Bull. Soc. int. Criminal., 1959, ler Semestre, pp. 23-32; George B.
Void, ‘Crime in City and Country Areas’, Ann. Amer. Acad. Pol. Soc. Sci., Vol.
217, Sept. 1941, pp. 38-45; Donald R. Taft, Criminology, 3rd cd., 1956, Ch. 11 ;
Prevention of Types of Criminality Resulting from Social Changes and Accompany-
ing Economic Development in Less Developed Countries: General Reports by J.
J. Panakal and A. M. Khalifa, Second United Nations Congress on the Preven-
tion of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, London, 1960; Hans Hermann
Burchardt, Kriminalitat in Stadt und Land, Berlin-Leipzig, 1936; Denis Szabo,
Crimes et Villes, Paris, 1960; W. Gierlichs and H. H. Burchardt, ‘Stadt und
Land’, in Handworterbuch der Kriminologie, Vol. 2, Berlin-Leipzig, 1935, pp.

654- 75; E. C. Rhodes, J. roy. Statis. Soc., Vol. 102, Part 3, 1939, pp. 384 ff.;
Carr-Saunders, Mannheim, and Rhodes, Young Offenders, London, 1944, pp.
46-50. On the history of ecological studies in England: Yale Levin and Alfred
Lindesmith, ‘English Ecology and Criminology’, J. crim. Law , Criminol. Police
Sci., Vol. 27, 1936-7, pp. 801-16.

2 Tappan, Crime, Justice and Correction, New York, 1960, pp. 205-7; Void,
Theoretical Criminology, pp. 189-90,

3 J. M. van Bemmelen, Criminologie, 3rd ed., Zwolle, 1952, Ch. 7, very de-
tailed; Franz Exner, Kriminologie, 3rd ed., 1949, pp. 234 ff.; Stephan Hurwitz,
Criminology, London-Copenhagen, 1952, pp. 252 ff.; Handworterbuch der
Kriminologie, Vol. 2, 654 ff.

4 T. P. Morris, op. cit., p. 7.

1 Franz Exner, Kriminalbioiogie, 1st ed., Hamburg, 1939, pp. 57 ff.

8 Reckless, Criminal Behavior, pp. 59 ff.

7 Morris, op. cit., pp. 48 ff.

8 J. roy. Statis. Soc., Vol. 43, 1880, pp. 423 ff., 434.

6 Willem Adriaan Bonger, Criminality and Economic Conditions (Enri. ed
Boston, 1916), pp. 529 ff. b

725

NOTES TO PAGES 535-541

10 On this see Ch. 5 on ‘Unemployment’ in my Social Aspects and the present
Chapter under CII/3(g).

11 Denis Szabo {op. cit. at note 1), p. 79.

12 Group Problems, pp. 169-70.

18 Mabel A. Elliott and Francis E. Merrill, Social Disorganization, 4th ed..
New York, 1960, p. 565.

14 Group Problems, pp. 86 ff., and earlier already in War and Crime, p. 136.

16 Cyril Burt, The Young Delinquent, p. 77, found in Shoreditch a delinquency
rate of 0-28 against 0-14 in Bethnal Green, but he gives no figures to show the rate
of mobility. He shows, however, a poor relief rate of 51-2 for Shoreditch against
one of 24-8 for Bethnal Green.

16 Gianfranco Garavaglia e Gianluigi Ponti, ‘Immigrazione e Criminality,
Quad. Criminal. Clin., Anno 5, No. 3, July-Sept. 1963, pp. 347-58. Also Clinard,
Sociology of Deviant Behavior, pp. 71-3.

17 Leonard Savitz, Delinquency and Migration; a report prepared for the Com-
mission on Human Relations, Philadelphia, 1960; reprinted in Wolfgang et al.,
The Sociology of Crime and Delinquency, pp. 199-205.

18 See Group Problems, p. 198.

10 Mannheim and Wilkins, Prediction Methods in relation to Borstal Training,
pp. 88-9.

20 Group Problems, pp. 86 ff.

21 See for U.S.A., Group Problems, pp. 194-5; Thorsten Sellin, Culture Conflict
and Crime, Soc. Sci. Res. Counc. Bull. 41, New York, 1938, pp. 63-116; Samuel
Koenig, ‘The Immigrant and Crime’, in Joseph S. Roucek, Sociology of Crime,
London, 1961, pp. 138-59; Donald R. Taft, Criminology, Ch. 8; E. H. Stofflet,
‘The European Immigrant and his Children’, Am. Amer. Acad. Pol. Soc. Sci.,
Vol. 217, Sept. 1941, pp. 84-92; Mabel A. Elliott, Crime in Modem Society, New
York, 1952, pp. 288-97; W. I. Thomas and F. Znaniecki, The Polish Peasant in
Europe and America, New York, 1927, Vol. 2.

22 Lloyd P. Gartner, The Jewish Immigrant in England 1870-1914, London,
1960, pp. 183-6.

28 See Taft, op. cit., pp. 153-4; Elliott, op. cit., pp. 288-9.

21 See the interesting and fully documented article by A. G. Mezey, ‘Psychiatric
Aspects of Human Migrations’, Int. J. soc. Psychiat., Vol. 5, No. 4, Spring 1960,
pp. 245-60. Also Clinard, Sociology of Deviant Behavior, pp. 71-3.

25 See Handworterbuch der Kriminologie, Vol. 1, p. 91, and on the excess of
adolescents and young adults among the migrant population in general D. S.
Thomas, Research Memorandum on Migration Differentials, Soc. Sci. Res.
Counc. Bull., 1938, p. 43.

20 Stofflet, op. cit., p. 84.

27 See, e.g., the tables in Elliott, op. cit., pp. 290-2, and Sellin, op. cit., pp. 75-7.

28 Taft, op. cit., p. 155; Sellin, op. cit., pp. 78-82.

29 Frederick M. Thrasher, The Gang, 1st ed., Chicago, 1927, pp. 191 ff.

80 ‘Culture Conflict and Delinquency’, Mental Hygiene, Vol. 21, No. 1, Jan.
1937, pp. 46-66.

81 A. L. Wood, J. crim. Law Criminol. Police Sci., Vol. 37, No. 6, 1947, p. 504.

82 Stofflet, op. cit,, p. 85.

38 Thomas and Znaniecki, op. cit., Vol. 2, p. 1756.

84 E. D. Beynon, J. crim. Law Criminol., Vol. 25, 1935, pp. 755 ff.

38 See also Walter C. Reckless, The Crime Problem, New York, 1940, pp. Ill—

112 .

80 Gabriel Tarde, Philosophic pdnale, 4th ed., Paris, 1895, p. 343. See also
Henri Joly, La France criminelle, Paris, 1889, p. 61.

726

NOTES TO PAGES 541-547

37 Denis Szabo, Crime et Villes, pp. 130-1.

39 Social Survey of Merseyside, Vol. 1, ed. by D. Caradog Jones, Liverpool-
London, 1934, Ch. 3.

33 See the figures in Social Aspects of Crime in England between the Wars,
p. 139, but also the explanation given on pp. 38, 74, 140.

<0 According to the (unpublished) ‘Home Office Supplementary Statistics re-
lating to Crime and Criminal Proceedings in the year 1961’, Table 4, the figures of
indictable offences known to the Police were for Liverpool 20,909, for Man-
chester 24,804, for Birmingham 25,498.

41 F. H. McClintock and Evelyn Gibson, Robbery in London, London 1961,
pp. 51,65.

43 It was perhaps somewhat unfortunate XhzXThe Times of 12.3. 1962, while also
scrupulously fair in its extracts from the study, should have headed its report,
‘High proportion of Irishmen and West Indians convicted’.

43 See in particular Ruth Glass, Newcomers, The West Indians in London,
Centre for Urban Studies, Report No. 1, London, 1960; K. L. Little, Negroes in
Britain, London, 1948; Anthony H. Richmond, Colour Prejudice in Britain, 1954
(now in a revised Paperback ed., 1960), and the material quoted in these books.

44 Michael Banton estimated the number of persons of Negro descent in
Britain in 1954 at about 35,000 and of coloured residents of all nationalities at
about 75,000 ( The Times, 31 .5.1954). In recent years these numbers will have con-
siderably increased. In a letter to The Times, 12.10.1964, Ruth Glass quotes the
following net annual intake by Britain from Asian, African, Caribbean countries
of the Commonwealth: 1961 : 125,400; 1963: 53,350; 1964, first half: 28,250. As
the control of immigration started in July 1962 these figures show an increase
before and immediately after the institution of control, with a subsequent
decline.

45 Ruth Glass, op. c/7., Chs. 2-5. See now also the careful study of a particularly
difficult area of London by Pearl Jephcott, A Troubled Area. Notes on Notting
Hill, London, 1964.

45 T. C. N. Gibbens and Joyce Prince, Shoplifting, London, I.S.T.D., 1962,
Ch. 4.

47 Hansard, 4.4.1963.

48 See the literature in note 1.

43 See Items, published by the Social Science Research Council, New York,
Vol. 13, No. 4, Dec. 1959, pp. 40-3.

80 Ruth Glass, Ch. 26 in Society, Problems and Methods of Study, ed. by A. T.
Welford, Michael Argyle, D. V. Glass, J. N. Morris, London, 1962, pp. 481-97.
Also Ch. 27 on ‘Rural Society’ by V. G, Pons in the same volume.

11 Quoted from the Rev. W. D. Morrison, Young Offenders, London, 1896,
pp. 30-1.

33 Quoted from Roger Wilson, Difficult Housing Estates, London, 1963, pp.

53 Robert Sinclair, Metropolitan Man, London, 1937, p. 133.

84 David Riesman et al.. The Lonely Crowd, pp. 34 and passim.

85 Clifford R. Shaw, The Natural History of a Delinquent.

88 Void in Annals (see note 1), pp. 42-3.

87 See, e.g., Clinard, op, cit., pp. 69, 88, against the hypothesis of selective
migration of deviants; Otto Klineberg, Race and Psychology, UNESCO, 1951,
p. 18, similarly against the theory of selective migration of more intelligent in-
dividuals.

88 In Sidney and Beatrice Webb, English Prisons under Local Government ,
London, 1922, p. xxvi.

727

NOTES TO PAGES 547-555

,0 Social Aspects of Crime, pp, 115-17.

# "P. 117,

John A. Mnek, Brit. J. Sociol., Vol. 15, No. 1, March 1964, p. 43.

83 See note 41 above.

88 Clinard, Sociology of Deviant Behavior , p, 69.

81 See note 1 above,

88 Note 1 above.

88 Now Pinatcl also in his Crimlnologlc, Paris, 1963, p. 93.

m Archivum Krlmhtologli, Vol. 1, Warsaw, 1960, pp, 364-6,

n Bombay, 1959, pp. 43 IT., 113 (T.

M S. Vcmigopala Rao, Facets of Crime in India, New Dclhi-London, 1963, p.
57. See also the case of homicide discussed by G, M. Carstairs, Iirlt. J. Dcllnn,,
Vol. 4, No, 1, July 1953, pp. 14 IT., also referred to above, p. 608.

70 E. C, Rhodes, J. toy. Stalls, Soc., Voi. 102, Part 3, 1939, pp. 384 O'.

71 Prediction Methods (cited at note 19), p. 95.

78 Sco note 1 above.

73 Clinard, Amer, Sociol. Rev., Vol. 25, No. 2, April 1960.

74 See the literature cited at note 1 and on one specific aspect Donald J. Hogue,
Skid Row in American Cities, Chicago, 1963,

78 Quoted in A. M. Carr-Saunders c.t ah, Young Offenders, my Ch. 1, p. 7,

78 The Young Delinquent, pp. 70-8.

77 See note 1 above.

78 Sco in particular the relevant Chapters in T. P. Morris’s book.

70 For the details see T. P. Morris, op. c it., and the relevant chapter in such
American textbooks as Barnes and Teeters, op. cit .; Taft, op. clt Reckless,
Criminal Behavior, and also Ogburn-NimkotT, Handbook of Sociology, Ch. 14.

88 R. E. Park, E. W. Burgess and R. D. McKenzie, The City, Chicago, 1925,
p, 55. This design is reproduced in Ogburn-Nimkoff, op. cit., Fig. 11.

81 Kobrin, Conflict of Values (cited at note 1).

82 According to Boguc the residents of the Skid Row areas of the big American
cities arc social outcasts, drunkards, and misfits rather than criminals, but such
districts attract criminate, especially ‘jnckrollers’ and pickpockets, who find easy
victims among the residents.

88 See, c.g., the data given in Simw, The Jack Roller (cited at Ch. 8, note 18),
p. 35, which arc a good illustration of the national and racial changes between
1900-26.

84 Lander, op. cit., p. 84.

,lfl Jonasson, Amer. Sociol. Rev., Vol. 14, 1949, pp» 614 fif,

80 C, R. Shaw and I I. D, McKay, Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas, 1942.
On this sco Morris, op. cit., p. 80.

87 Juvenile Delinquency in an English Middletown, pp. 34-5.

(1 " Morris, op. clt., p. 23.

80 Tony Parker and Robert Allcrton, The Courage of his Convictions, London,
1962, Ch. 1.

80 J. W. M. Thompson, the Evening Standard, 9. 5.1963. In May 1963 several
men were sent to prison at the Central Criminal Court in London for operating a
’protection racket’ among Chinese restaurant owners in Soho (The Times,
17.5.1963). Another expert on Soho,' Mark Benney, described it ns a district of
‘inexhaustible interest' to children on account of the innumerable opportunities
for pilfering and gambling which it offered ; see his Low Company, London, 1936,
pp, 49-50. The evidence given to the Challcnor Tribunal in 1964 has thrown
further light on conditions in Soho; sco, o.g., the summing up in the Sunday
Times of the 20.1 1.1964.

728

NOTES TO PAGES 555-566

81 Middletown, pp. 31-37, and the map, pp. 60-1.

® 2 Roger Wilson, Difficult Housing Estates , London, 1963. The first part of the
report of the Bristol team has been published under the title Stress and Release in
an Urban Estate, by John C. Spencer et al., London, 1964.

83 Spencer, Brit. J. Delinq., Vol. 7, p. 146.

94 Howard Jones, Brit. J. Delinq., Vol. 8, 1958, pp. 277-93.

95 Middletown, p. 32.

89 Thomas Ferguson, The Young Delinquent in his Social Setting, London,
1952, p. 18.

87 Tadashi Uematsu, ‘The Delinquency Area in Tokyo’, Int. Ann. Criminol.,
1962, pp. 357-9.

99 Solomon Kobrin, Annals (see note 1), p. 19.

98 On this see also Merton, op. cit., above, Ch. 22.

100 Unpublished Annual Report, issued by the Chicago Area Project, 907 South
Wolcott Avenue, Chicago 12. On the Project see also Clinard, op. cit., pp. 526-8.

101 Cyril Burt, The Young Delinquent, p. 87.

103 Carr-Saunders, Mannheim, Rhodes, Young Offenders, London, 1942, pp.
77-83.

103 Middletown, pp. 30-1.

104 See, e.g., Clinard, op. cit., pp. 110-12.

105 Lander (op. cit., at Ch. 22, note 15), pp. 73 ff.

199 Ibid., pp. 55-6, 71, 88.

187 Social Aspects of Crime, pp. 350-1.

108 Sellin, Culture Conflict and Crime, p. 58, fn. 1 .

109 The Doukhobors are called ‘a unique and baffling criminological problem’
by W. T. McGrath, Executive Secretary of the Canadian Corrections Associa-
tions, Int. Ann. Criminol. 1963, p. 610.

119 Rao (op. cit. at note 69), pp. 54-7.

111 Arthur Lewis Wood, ‘Crime and Aggression in Changing Ceylon’, Trans.
Amer. Philosoph. Soc., New Series, Vol. 51, Part 8, Philadelphia, Dec. 1961 ; the
same, 'Minority-Group Criminality and Cultural Integration’, J. crim. Law
Criminol. Police Sci., Vol. 37, No. 6, March-April 1947, pp. 498-510.

113 Sessional Paper XIV— 1959, Government Publication Bureau, Colombo,
pp. 19 ff., 27.

113 Barnes and Teeters, New Horizons in Criminology, 1st cd., pp. 198-202. See
also Group Problems in Crime and Punishment, p. 201 j Arthur Raper, The Tragedy
of Lynching, Chapel Hill, N.C., 1933; T. Grygier, Oppression, p. 173 with
bibliog.

114 See, e.g., the important discussion of this question by Herbert Jager,
‘Betrachtungen zum Eichmann-Prozess’, Mschr. Kriminol. Strafrechtsreform,
Vol. 45, No. 3-4, Aug. 1962, pp. 73-83.

116 W. A. Bonger, Race and Crime, trans. from the Dutch by Margaret Mathew
Hordyk, New York, 1943; Hans von Hentig, Crime Causes and Conditions, New
York, 1947, Ch. 7; Franz Exner, Kriminalbiologie, 1st ed., Hamburg, 1939, Ch.
5: ‘Volkscharakter und Verbrechen’; also Ch. 6 of the 3rd ed., which appeared
in 1949 under the title Kriminologie, Berlin-Gottingen-Heidelberg.

118 In addition to the literature in note 115 see Hans von Hentig, J. crim. Law
Criminol. Police Sci., Vol. 31, 1940, pp. 662-80; my Group Problems, pp. 196-205,
with many further references.

117 The Negro in the United States, revised ed. 1957, New York, Ch. 25.

118 Democracy. in America, 1945 ed., New York, Vol. 1, p. 362.

118 Joseph S. Roucek, ‘The Sociological Framework of the Negro Problem’,
Indian J. Soc. Res., Vol. 2, No. 1, Jan. 1961, p. 13.

729

NOTES TO PAGES 566-572

320 The table by Roesner in Handworterbuch der Kriminologie, 1st ed., 1933,
Vol. 2, pp. 48-9, may be out of date, but no major additions are likely to have
been made to the few countries listed, all non-European except Czechoslovakia.
The Netherlands should also have been included, however.

321 A case of this kind is reported by Cloward and Ohlin, Delinquency and
Opportunity, p. 200. '

322 Crime: Causes and Conditions, p. 159.

323 H. A. Bullock, J. crim. Law Criminol. Police Sci., Vol. 52, No. 4, Nov -
Dec. 1961, pp. 411-17.

324 Quoted from Bloch and Geis (op. cit. at Ch. 21, note 1), pp. 180-1.

325 See the references in Group Problems , pp. 198-9.

126 Bonger (op. cit. at note 115), pp. 51-66.

327 Op. cit. at note 115, pp. 67-71.

328 Hagemann, Handworterbuch der Kriminologie, 1st ed. 1934, Vol. 2, p. 457.

320 E. Mezger, Kriminalpolitik auf kriminologischer Grundlage, Stuttgart, 1934,

p. 144, and fn. 3.

320 Radbruch and Gwinner, Geschichte des Verbrechens, pp. 109 ff., Ch. 14.

331 On the historical background of this process see, e.g., Morris Ginsberg,
Reason and Unreason in Society, pp. 204-5; Gerhard Masur, Friedrich Julius
Stahl, Berlin, 1930, pp. 4 If. (in German) ; Encyclopedia Britannica, art. Jews.

332 Werner Sombart, Die Juden im Wirtschaftsleben, Leipzig, 1911, Eng. trans.
by M. Epstein, London, 1913, esp. pp. 130 ff., 153, 169 ff.

333 On the following text see Shlomo Shoham, ‘The Application of the “Culture
Conflict” Hypothesis to the Criminality of Immigrants in Israel’, J. crim. Law
Criminol. Police Sci., Vol. 53, No. 2, June 1962, pp. 207-14. Also Eisenstadt, ‘The
Oriental Jews in Israel’, Jewish Soc. Studies, Vol. 12, No. 3, 1950.

334 Shoham, op. cit., p. 211. Bonger, Geloof en Misdaad, 1913.

335 Publications of the Institute of Criminology, No. 1, Jerusalem, 1962, Table
47.

386 G. Th. Kempe, Criminaliteit en Kerkenootschap, Utrecht, 1938; the same
in the 3rd ed. of Bonger’s Jnleiding tot de Criminologie, Haarlem, 1954, pp. 175 ff.;
G. H. A. Feber, De criminaliteit der Katholieken in Nederland, 1933; J. M. van
Bemmelen, Kriminologie, 3rd ed. Zwolle, 1952, pp. 298 ff. ; H. Bianchi, Crime and
Religious Profession (in English), Amsterdam, Free Univ. Quart., Vol. 5, No. 1,
Nov. 1957, pp. 24-42. For a very popular discussion of the subject see J. Arthur
Hoyles, Religion in Prison, New York, 1955.

337 E.g., Taft, Criminology, Ch. 15; Barnes and Teeters, New Horizons in
Criminology, Ch. 1 1 ; Mabel Elliott, op. cit., pp. 834-6 ; Ernst Seelig, Lehrbuch der
Kriminologie, pp. 189-91; Exner, Kriminalbiologie, pp. 118-21; Erwin Hacker,
Der Einjluss der Konfession auf die Kriminalitat in Ungarn, Miscolc, 1930.

138 See also T. P. and P. Morris, Pentonville, pp. 39, 297.

130 See on this my Juvenile Delinquency in an English Middletown, pp. 27-8.

140 M. J. Moroney, Facts from Figures, Harmondsworth, 1951, p. 303.

343 Max Weber, ‘Die Protestantische Ethik und der Geist des Kapitalismus’
Gesammelte Aufsatze, Vol. 1, 1921.

143 Tawney, op. cit., Paperback ed., Harmondsworth, 1938, p. 284.

343 Walter Mannzen, Mschr. Kriminalpsychol. Strafrechtsreform, Vol. 23,
1932, pp. 365-71. Also Ernst Seelig, Kriminologie, pp. 189-91.

344 W. H. Nagel, ‘Criminality and Religion’ (in Eng.), Tijdschrift voor Straf-
recht, Vol. 69, No. 5, 1960 (special Congress number), pp. 236-91.

346 Wood (op. cit. at note 111), pp. 34-6.

340 The literature on economic factors in crime is very extensive, especially on
the Continent. Only the following publications can here be mentioned: J. van

730

NOTES TO PAGES 574-580

Kan, Las causes economiques de la criminality, Paris-Lyon, 1903; W. A. Bonger,
Criminality et Conditions yconomiques, Amsterdam, 1905, Amer. ed.: Criminality
and Economic Conditions, Boston, 1916; Karl Roesner, art. ‘Wirtschaftslage und
Strafialligkeit’ in Handworterbuch der Kriminologie, Vol. 2, 1936, pp. 1079-1 1 1 6 i ;
Thorsten Sellin, Research Memorandum on Crime in the Depression, Soc. Sci.
Res. Coimc. Bull. 27, New York, 1937; Hermann Mannheim, Social Aspects of
Crime in England between the Wars, Ch. 4, 5, 7; the same, Group Problems, Ch.
5 ; the same. Criminal Justice and Social Reconstruction, Ch. 6-9 ; the same, War
and Crime ; van Bemmelen, Kriminologie, Ch. 2; Exner, Kriminalbiologie, Ch. 8;
Taft, Criminology, Ch. 9; Bonger, Introduction, pp. 26 ft., 90 ff. ; George B. Void,
Theoretical Criminology, Ch. 9 ; Dorothy S. Thomas, Social Aspects of the Business
Cycle, London, 1925.

l « Aristotle, Politics, II, 7, 11, 13 (B. Jowett’s trans., Oxford, 1885, vol. 1).
See also my War and Crime, p. 40.

118 Sir Thomas More, Utopia, Everyman’s ed., London, 1951, pp. 21 ff.; G. M.
Trevelyan, English Social History, 1st ed., London, 1944, pp. 109 if., has sur-
prisingly little to say on More’s Utopia and the social evils which he attacked.
Only some forms of enclosure, he thinks, defrauded the poor, but he had to
admit that no doubt a certain proportion lost their places and swelled the ranks
of the ‘sturdy beggars’.

119 Edouard Ducpdtiaux, Mymoire stir le pauperisme dans les Flandres,
Bruxelles, 1850.

180 Some details are given by Sellin, op. cit., pp. 20-1.

181 T. P. Morris, The Criminal Area, pp. 60-1.

182 Cesare Lombroso, Crime: Causes and Remedies, Chs. 6, 9.

183 Enrico Ferri, ‘Studi sulla criminality in Francia del 1826 al 1878’, Annali di
statistica serl. 2, Vol. 21, 1881, reprinted in his Studi sulla criminalita ed altri
saggi, Turin, 1901, pp. 17-97. See on this Sellin in Pioneers in Criminology, p. 283.

181 Georg von Mayr, ‘Statistik der gerichtlichen Polizei im Konigreiche
Bayern, etc.’ in Beitrage zur Statistik im Konigreiche Bayern, Miinchen, 1867.

188 See, e.g., Bonger, Introduction, p. 54; Roesner, Handworterbuch, p. 1089;
van Bemmelen, Kriminologie, p. 171 ; Exner, op. cit., 1st ed., p. 94.

188 For the details see Bonger’s exhaustive book.

187 Widely quoted in this connection has been W. Woytinski’s paper ‘Krim-
inalitatund Lebensmittelpreise’, Z.ges. Strafrechtwiss, Vol. 49, 1929, pp. 647-75.

188 Even in Dagenham Peter Willmott found that the Ford Company did not
dominate the estate, and the community was by no means merely a ‘company
town’, Dagenham, 1963, pp. 16-7.

189 Useful critical discussions of Thomas’s work can be found in Sellin’s
Crime in the Depression, pp. 33-8, and Void, Theoretical Criminology, pp. 178-81.

180 The question has been very fully discussed by Sellin, op. cit., Ch. 4.

161 See my Social Aspects of Crime, p. 125.

183 Void, op. cit., pp. 177-8.

163 The Young Delinquent, lsted., 1925, pp. 66 ff.

181 Charles Booth, Life and Labour of the People in London, London, 1892-7;
Seebohm Rowntree, Poverty, 4th ed., London, 1902; the same, Poverty: A Second
Social Survey of York, London, 1941 ; S. Rowntree and G. R. Lavers, Poverty and
the Welfare State: a Third Social Survey of York, London, 1951.

188 A. M. Carr-Saunders, Hermann Mannheim and E. C. Rhodes, Youm
Offenders, London, 1942, pp. 72 ff. 6

188 Ewald Renger, Kriminalitat, Preis und Lohn, Leipzig, 1933; on it also
Exner, op. cit., 1st ed., pp. 99-101.

187 See, e.g., Peter Townsend, ‘Measuring Poverty’, Brit. J. Sociol., Vol. 5, No.

Til

NOTES TO PAGES 581-588

2, June 1954, pp. 130-7 ; also, New Statesman, 20.4.1962, pp. 552-4; Brian Abel-
Smith, ibid., 28.2. 1963 ; Dorothy Wedderbum, Sociol. Rev., Vol. 10, No. 3.

UB See also Void, op. cit,, pp. 99 ff.

1CS Reprinted in Group Problems, p. 105.

1,0 London, 1961, pp. 145, 163.

171 See my article ‘Rechtsgefuhl und Dichtung’ (see above, end of Chapter 2
and note 7 to Ch. 16).

172 Criminal Justice and Social Reconstruction, pp. 102-8; Group Problems, pp.
20-4; and the literature quoted.

173 See above, Ch. 10, II, 1.

174 See, e.g., an interview published in the Kentish Times, 24.5.1963.

176 See Social Aspects of Crime, pp. 188-97.

170 See Juvenile Delinquency in an English Middletown, pp. 66-7, Group Prob-
lems, p. 90, and the Report of the ( Curtis ) Committee on the Care of Children,
London, H.M.S.O., Cmd. 6922, 1946, paras. 206 if.

177 On the methods of coping with stealing and destructiveness in Children’s
Homes see Howard Jones, Reluctant Rebels, London, 1960, pp. 121-3. On
vandalism by young people see the symposium in Fed. Prob., Vol. 18, March
1954, pp. 3-16.

178 The Insecure Offenders, pp. 126-8.

170 The Times, 13.12.1962.

180 The Times, 17.12.1962.

181 The Times, 23.10.1962.

182 Group Problems, pp. 102-4.

188 See, e.g., Kerawalla, op. cit., pp. 58-9; Rao (op. cit. at note 69), pp. 33-5.

184 The Times, 24.5.1963; ‘Requiem for a Missing Smuggler’.

185 Danilo Dolci, The Outlaws of Particino, London, 1960. (Eng. trans. of
Bandit i a Particino) ; Carlo Levi, Christ Stopped at Eboli, London, 1954; the same,
Words are Stones, London, 1959, pp. 169-70 and passim.

180 Exner, Kriminologie, 1st ed., pp. 110-13; 2nd ed., pp. 82-4.

187 Group Problems, op. cit., p. 102.

188 Hans von Hentig, Crime : Causes and Conditions, pp. 209-19; Hermann
Mannheim, Social Aspects of Crime, Ch. 5 ; Howard Jones, Crime and the Penal
System, pp. 64-7.

180 Cloward and Ohlin, Delinquency and Opportunity (above, Ch. 22), p. 84,
fn. 6; also Daniel Glaser and Kent Rice, Amer. Sociol. Rev., Vol. 24, 1959, pp.
679-86.

100 John Morgan, ‘The Other Face of America’, New Statesman, 5.7.1963, p. 6.

181 On the various aspects of the relationship between occupation and crime, in
particular juvenile delinquency, see: Norwood East, The Adolescent Criminal,
Ch. 6; Hermann Mannheim, Social Aspects of Crime, Chs. 9-10; Joseph Trena-
man, Out of Step, London, 1952, Ch. 16; Mannheim and Wilkins, Prediction
Methods in Relation to Borstal Training, Ch. 5, pp. 102-8, 165-9; Carr-Saundcrs,
Mannheim, Rhodes, Young Offenders, pp. 1 00-4 ; Paul Reiwald in Die Prophylaxe
des Verbrechen, ed. by Heinrich Meng, Basle, 1948, pp. 173-80; Max Hagemann,
art. ‘Beruf’ in Handworterbuch der Kriminologie, 1st ed. 1932, Vol. 1, pp. 1 13-26;
Franz Exner, Kriminalbiologie, 1st ed., pp. 294-9; Donald R. Cressey, Other
People's Money, Glencoe, 111., 1953, pp. 84-5; Mabel Elliott, Crime in Modern
Society, New York, 1952, pp. 354-5; Clifford Shaw, The Jack Roller, Chicago,
1930, p. 166; Mark Benney, Charity Main, London, 1946, pp. 168 ff.; Reports of
the Advisory Council on the Employment of Prisoners, (1) on ‘Work for Prisoners’,
H.M.S.O., 1961, (2) on ‘Work and Vocational Training in Borstals’, H.M.S.O.,
1962.

732

NOTES TO PAGES 588-597

18 s Sec on the pre-war position Roesner in Handworterbuch der Kriminologie,
Vol. 1, p. 48.

183 Pacifist writers describe militarism as 'une veritable ecole du cnme (see
War and Crime, p. 80).

184 A. J. Loughborough Bali, Trial and Error. The Fire Conspiracy and After,
London, 1936, p. 17.

186 Hans Walder, Triebstruktur und Kriminalitiit, Bern-Stuttgart, 1952, pp.

46-7.

180 Mark Benney, Charity Main, pp. 168-70.

187 For interesting examples of this kind see H. E. Burtt, Psychology and In-
dustrial Efficiency, New York-London, 1929, pp. 195 ff. Recently T. Grygier has
stressed the dangers arising from discrepancies between intelligence and occupa-
tion: in Criminology in Transition, ed. by him, Howard Jones, and John Spencer,
London, 1965, p. 164.

188 €. Wright Mills, White Collar, Paperback ed., New York, 1956, p. 229.

188 Young Offenders, p. 103; Trenaman (op. cit. at note 191), p. 138.

100 See the author’s War and Crime, London, 1941; Social Aspects of Crime,
Ch. 4; Group Problems, Ch. 5; Walter A. Lunden, ‘War and Delinquency’,
U.N.O., 1960 (stencilled); Hans von Hentig, Crime: Causes and Conditions, Ch.
13; Franz Exner, Krieg mid Kriminalitat in Osterreich, Vienna, 1927; Moritz
Licpmann, Krieg und Kriminalitat in Deutschland, Stuttgart-Berlin-Leipzig, and
New Haven 1930; ‘The Effect of the War on Criminality’, Bull. int. Penal
Penitent. Comm. (I.P.P.C.), Vol. 15, No. 4/11, of the Select Papers on Penal and
Penitentiary Affairs, Berne, 1951 (in English and French, also published as a
separate volume; in the present book the page references are to the separate
volume); La ddlinquance juvenile en Belgique de 1939 d 1957, par Aimde Racine,
Centre d’Etudc de la Delinquance Juvenile, Publication No. 2, Bruxelles, 1959;
Marshall B. Clinard, Sociology of Deviant Behavior, Ch. 20; the same, The Black
Market, New York, 1952; Karl S. Bader, Soziologie der dcutschen Nachkriegs-
Kriminalitat, Tubingen, 1949.

501 War and Crime (cited at note 200), pp. 72 if.

303 Ernst Seelig, Kriminologie, p. 182; Exner, op. cit., 3rd ed., p. 102.

303 Stephen Hurwitz, Criminology, London-Copenhagen, 1952, p. 298. This
seems to be a reference to Liepmann’s remarks (see note 200), pp. 164-5.

304 War and Crime, pp. 65-6.

305 E.g., Exner, Kriminologie, 3rd ed,, p. 99; Seelig, Lehrbuch der Kriminologie,
Graz, 1951, p. 179; Wolf Middendorff, Soziologie des Verbrechens, Dvisseldorf-
K61n, 1959, pp. 244-5; H. Mannheim, War and Crime, pp. 75-6, 108; I.P.P.C,
symposium, pp. 86 (England), 160, 246 (Sweden).

306 War and Crime, p. 65.

307 Hans von Hentig, Crime, pp. 341-2; Renger (op. cit. at note 166), p. 60.

309 This is also stressed with regard to revolutions by Lyford P. Edwards, The
Natural History of Revolution, Chicago Univ. Sociol. Ser. 1927, p. 136. See further
Edward Glover, War, Sadism and Pacifism, London, 1933, p. 127.

308 E.g., I.P.P.C. symposium, p. 7 (Belgium).

310 This is emphasized by Exner, op. cit., pp. 101-2.

311 Bader, op. cit., pp. 74 ff., 84, 124, 129; Exner, op. cit., pp. 100 ff.

313 War and Crime, pp. 98-9, 134; Group Problems, pp. 94, 102.

313 Norval Morris, The Habitual Criminal, London, 1951, p. 26. Also I.P.P.C.

symposium, p. 95. 1

314 I.P.P.C. symposium, pp. 76, 143.

3,5 Ibid, pp. 214, 263.

3,8 Ibid, pp. 37, 141, 161 if.

733

NOTES TO PAGES 597-600

517 Bader, op. cit., pp. 154 ff \

= 18 See, e.g., War and Crime, pp. 108-9, Group Problems, p. 94.

210 War and Crime, pp. 101 If.

220 Group Problems, pp. 88 if.

221 D. H. Stott, Delinquency and Human Nature, p. 365.

222 A Home Office Research Unit Report, H.M.S.O., London, 1960.

223 Notably by A. A. Walters, Brit. J. Crim., Vol. 3, No. 4, April 1963, pp.
391-5.

224 War and Crime, p. 71.

- 25 Lunden, op. cit., p. 25; I.P.P.C., pp. 58, 79, gives different figures, but the
trend is the same.

220 Lunden, op. cit., p. 33, 41; similarly I.P.P.C., pp. 12, 205; Racine, op. cit.,
p. 24.

227 Lunden, op. cit., p. 35; I.P.P.C., p. 141.

328 Wolf Middendorff, Jugendkriminologie, Ratingen, 1956, p. 26; Blau,
Z. ges. Strafrechtwiss., Vol. 64, pp. 1 ff.

229 Sutherland-Cressey, Principles of Criminology, 5th ed., 1955, pp. 77-9;
The Sutherland Papers, Part 1 ; Donald R. Cressey, ‘The Differential Association
Theory and Compulsive Crime’, J. crim. Law Criminol. Police Science, Vol. 45,
No. 1, May-June 1954, pp. 29-40; the same, ‘Application and Verification of the
Differential Theory’, the same Journal, Vol. 43, No. 1, May-June 1952, pp.
43-52; the same, ‘Epidemiology and Individual Conduct: A Case from Crimin-
ology’, Pacific Sociol. Rev., Vol. 3, No. 2, Autumn 1960, pp. 47-58.

Critical: Sheldon Glueck, ‘Theory and Fact in Criminology: A Criticism of
Differential Association’, Brit. J. Delinq., Vol. 7, No. 2, Oct. 1956, pp. 92-8;
George B. Void, Theoretical Criminology, pp. 192-8; Clarence Ray Jeffery, ‘An
Integrated Theory of Crime and Criminal Behavior’, J. crim. Law, Criminol.
Police Sci., Vol. 49, No. 6, March-April 1959, pp. 537-8. See also several con-
tributions to Crime and Correction in Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 23,
No. 4, Autumn 1958.

In recent years Walter C. Reckless has tried to establish a ‘Containment’ or
‘Norm Containment Theory’, see his The Crime Problem, 3rd ed., New York,
1961, pp. 335-60, and Exc. Crim., Vol. 3, No. 6, 1963, with further references;
also Mschr. Kriminol. Strafrechtsreform, Vol. 44, June 1961.

230 Cressey, Other People' s Money , pp. 27, 147-8; the same, Epidemiology, p. 53.

231 Helena Normanton, The Trial of Alfred Arthur Rouse,. Edinburgh, 1931;
see also Social Aspects of Crime, p. 188; Handworterbuch der Kriminologie, lsted.,
Vol. 2, p. 955.

332 E. G. Wakefield, Facts relating to the Punishment of Death in the Metropolis,
London, 1832, App. p. 205.

233 John Newton Baker, ‘The Press and Crime’, J. crim. Law Criminol. Police
Sci., Vol. 33, March-April 1943, p. 463.

231 The Times, 29.6.1948.

235 See Cyril Burt, The Young Delinquent, pp. 143-50; the same, The Sub-
normal Mind, p. 173 ; Negley K. Teeters and John Otto Reinemann, The Challenge
of Delinquency, New York, 1950, pp. 177-91 ; Herbert S. Blumer and Philip M.
Hauser, Movies, Delinquency and Crime, New York, 1933; Richard Ford,
Children in the Cinema, London, 1939; Kimball Young, Handbook of Social
Psychology, 2nd ed., London, 1957 (2nd impr. 1960), Ch. 16; J. P. Mayer,
Sociology of Film, London, 1947; Edgar Dale, The Contents of Motion Pictures,
London, 1936, Ch. 8; The British Film Institute. Report of the Conference on
Films for Children, 20 and 21.11.1936: Emanuel Miller, The Psychology of
Children in Relation to Film-going ; C. Stanford Read, ‘Children at the Cinema’,

734

NOTES TO PAGES 601-606

the Nineteenth Century , Dec. 1935, pp. 750 ff.; Frederic Wertham, Seduction of
the Innocent, New York, 1953 (on ‘Comics’); Marshall B. Clinard, Sociology of
Deviant Behavior, pp. 163—7. On Television! Hilde B. Himmelweit et al., 'Tele-
vision and the Child, London, 1958; F. E. Emery, ‘Psychological Effects of the
Western Film’, Human Relations, Vol. 12, No. 3, 1959, pp. 195-232. On the
methodological issues involved: T. Grygier, ‘Leisure Pursuits of Juvenile Delin-
quents: A Study in Methodology’, Brit. J. Delinq., Vol. 5, No. 3, Jan. 1955, pp.
210-228.

334 See, e.g., Miller and Read as child psychiatrists {op. cit. at note 235).

“ 5 Lucien Bovet, ‘Psychiatric Aspects of Juvenile Delinquency’, W.H.O.,
Geneva, 1951, p. 38.

338 Dark Legend, London, 1947, pp. 87-90.

135 Dale {op. cit. at note 235), pp. 13, 123.

310 S. and E. Glueck, Unraveling Juvenile Delinquency, p. 161 ; Maud A. Mer-
rill, Problems of Child Delinquency, London, 1947, pp. 257-8.

341 The Times, 4.8.1937, 3.12.1937, 29.1.1943.

343 Ibid., 5.12.1947.

343 J. P. Mayer, op. cit. (note 235), pp. 140 ff.

344 Ibid., p. 279.

345 A committee has been set up to organize research on the subject, The
Times, 11.7.1963.

344 The Magistrate, March 1962, p. 38. See in particular, Nuffield Foundation
Study, Television and the Child (cited at note 235).

3,7 The Times, 22.7.1960.

344 Ibid., Sept. 1962.

343 See, L. Berkowitz, Scientific American, 1964, pp. 2, 35-41, 210.

350 Marshall B. Clinard {op. cit. at note 235), p. 174.

351 The Times, 8.7.1963.

Chapter 24

1 On Groups see Harry M. Johnson, Sociology, London, 1961, Ch. 1 ; George
C. Homans, The Human Group, London, 1951; Robert K. Merton, Social
Theory and Social Structure. Chs. 8, 9; W. J. H. Sprott, Human Groups, Har-
mondsworth, 1958; Social Behavior and Personality: Contributions of W. I.
Thomas to Theory and Social Research, ed. by Edmund H. Volkart, New York,
1951; Josephine Klein, The Study of Human Groups, London, 1956; Peter R.
Hofstatter, Gruppendynamik, Hamburg, 1957.

3 Sprott, op. cit., p. 9.

3 See the references in Merton, op. cit., p. 393, fn. 7.

4 Some of the general literature is listed in Michael Argyle’s chapter on ‘Ex-
perimental Studies of Small Social Groups’ in Society: Problems and Methods of
Study, London, 1962.

On this special aspect of small group research see, e.g., Theoretical Studies in
Social Organization of the Prison, Soc. Res. Counc. Pamph., No. 15, New York,
March 1960; John James, 'The Application of the Small Group Concept in the
the Study of the Prison Community’, Brit. J. Delinq ., Vol. 5, No. 4, April 1955,
pp. 269-80; Gresham M. Sykes, The Society of Captives, Princeton, 1958;
Terence and Pauline Morris, Pentonville, London, 1963.

4 J. L. Moreno, Who shall survive? Washington, 1934; Gordon Rose, Brit, J.
Delinq., Vol. 6, Nos. 3, 4, Jan. and April 1956, Vol. 9, No. 4, April 1959.

7 S. H. Foulkes and E. J. Anthony, Group Psychotherapy, Harmondsworth,

735

NOTES TO PAGES 607-611

8 Merton, op. cit., pp. 297-8.

9 Merton, op. cit., p. 233. See the whole of his Ch. 8.

10 Muzafer and Carolyn W. Sherif, An Outline of Social Psychology, rev. ed.
1956, New York, pp. 175 ff.

11 On the Family see:

(a) In general:

O. R. McGregor and Griselda Rowntree, Ch. 21 in Society (cited at note 4),
with full Bibliog.

(b) In relation to crime and delinquency:

Sheldon and Eleanor Glueck, Unraveling Juvenile Delinquency, the same,
Family Environment and Delinquency, London, 1962; Barbara Wootton, Social
Science and Social Pathology, Chs. 3, 4; Carr-Saunders, Mannheim, Rhodes,
Young Offenders', William Healy and Augusta Bronner, New Light on Delin-
quency, New Haven, 1936; G. R. Andry, Delinquency and Parental Pathology,
London, 1960; William McCord and Joan McCord, Origins of Crime, New York
and Oxford, 1959; Cyril Burt, The Young Delinquent, pp. 93-101 ; F. Ivan Nye,
Family Relationships and Delinquent Behavior, New York, 1959; Hermann Mann-
heim, The Criminological Significance of the Family, Bull. int. Soc. Criminol.,
Vol. 1, 1960, pp. 1-11; Joseph Trenaman, Out of Step, London, 1952, Ch. 21;
Christian Debuyst, Criminels et valeurs vicues, 2nd ed., Louvain, 1960, Eng. trans.
Criminals and Their World of Values by Nancy Ralli, London, 1965.

11 Merton, op. cit., p. 159 (similarly T. S. Eliot, Notes towards the Definition of
Culture, p. 43); Erich Fromm, The Fear of Freedom, London, 8th imp. 1960, p.
245; August Aichhom, Wayward Youth, Eng. ed.. New York, 1935, p. 159.

13 T. S. Simey, Welfare and Planning in the West Indies, Oxford, 1946, p. 15.

14 Clyde Kluckhohn, ‘Variations in the Human Family’, in The Family in a
Democratic Society, New York, 1949, p. 3. On the details of these variations see
the relevant chapters in the anthropological and sociological textbooks. On the
legal side W. Friedmann, Law in a Changing Society, London, 1959, Ch. 7.

16 Friedmann, op. cit., p. 206.

10 See, e.g., The Changing Pattern of Family in India, ed. by P. D. Devanandan
and M. M. Thomas, Bangalore, 1960.

17 G. M. Carstairs, Brit. J. Delinq., Vol. 4, No. 1, July 1953, pp. 14 ff.

18 See also above. Chapter 17 on Freud.

19 See the figures quoted by Ogbum and Nimkoff, A Handbook of Sociology,
1st ed., p. 120.

30 See, e.g., the American questionnaire enquiry reported in Adolescent
Development and Adjustment by Lester D. Crow and Alice Crow, New York,
1956, pp. 387 ff.

Sl Richard Hoggart, The Uses of Literacy, p. 20.

32 George C. Homans, The Human Group, pp. 314-15.

33 Kate Friedlander, The Psycho-Analytical Approach to Juvenile Delinquency,
p. 202.

24 D. H. Stott, Delinquency and Human Nature, p. 376.

36 Barbara Wootton, op. cit., Ch. 3.

23 See, e.g., Olof Kinberg, Basic Problems of Criminology, Copenhagen, 1935,
pp. 188, 412; Magri, Arch, di Psichiatria, 1896, quoted by Havelock Ellis, A Study
of British Genius, London, 1904, p. 110; Jean Pinatel, Criminologie, 1963, p. 249;
Ruth Durant, Walling, London, 1939, p. 72.

27 Report of the Departmental Committee on Sterilisation, H.M.S.O., 1934,
Cmd. 4485, pp. 18, 96.

28 Intelligence and Fertility, London, 1946, p. 15.

39 Emile Durkheim, Suicide, Eng. ed., London, 1952, p. 201.

736

NOTES TO PAGES 611-619

50 Denis Szabo, Crimes et villes (cited at Ch. 23, note 1), p. 82.

31 See M. Fortes, ‘The Influence of Position in Sibship on Juvenile Delin-
quency’, Economica, August 1933, pp. 301 £f.; Emanuel Miller, The Problem of
Birth-Order and Delinquency, in Mental Abnormality and Crime, pp. 227-39;
Raymond F. Sletto, Amer. J. Sociol., Vol. 39, 1934, pp. 665 fif.; Walter C. Reck-
less, Criminal Behavior, pp. 224-6; Cyril Burt, The Young Delinquent, p. 95; J.
P. Lees and L. J. Newson, ‘Family or Sibling Position and Some Aspects of
Juvenile Delinquency’, Brit. J. Delinq., Vol. 5, No. 1, July 1954, pp. 46-65; J.
Asa Shield and Austin E. Grigg, ‘Extreme Ordinal Position and Criminal Be-
havior’, A crim. Law Criminol. Police Sci., Sept.-Oct. 1944, pp. 169-73; Jean
Pinatel, Criminologie, p. 248. On the special difficulties of the only child, see also
Christian Debuyst, Criminels et valeurs vdcues, Part 2, Ch. 3, with interesting case
material.

32 See the references in Young Offenders, p. 27.

33 Alfred Adler, Individual Psychology, p. 201.

31 Family Environment and Delinquency, p. 127.

35 Gardner Murphy, L. B. Murphy and Theodore M. Newcomb, Experimental
Social Psychology, New York, 1937, pp. 348 ff., 362.

38 Sletto, op. cit., p. 666.

37 Clifford Shaw, Brothers in Crime, Chicago, 1938, p. 48. Some interesting
observations on the effect of the sibling position are also made by Burgess in
Shaw’s Natural History of a Criminal Career, p. 245 ff.

38 D. J. West, The Habitual Prisoner, London, 1963, p. 91.

38 See, however, the critical remarks on Burt’s findings and the whole concept
of defective discipline by D. H. Stott {op. cit. at note 24), pp. 368 ff.

40 Unraveling Juvenile Delinquency, pp. 130-3; Family Environment and Delin-
quency, pp. 132 ff., 154 and passim-, definition, p. 220.

41 The Psycho-Analytical Approach to Juvenile Delinquency, p. 101,

42 For a popular discussion of the matter from an American angle see, e.g.,
Vance Packard, The Status Seekers, Harmondsworth, 1961, p. 200.

43 The Adolescent Boy. A Report of the Joint Committee on Psychiatry and the
Law appointed by the British Medical Association and the Magistrates’ Associa-
tion, published by the B.M.A., London, 1951, p. 6.

44 See the recent remarks of an English High Court Judge, Mr. Justice Lawton,
The Times, 23.5.1964.

43 Thorsten Sellin, The Criminality of Youth, Philadelphia, 1940, p. 12.

43 New Light on Delinquency, p. 9.

47 Searchlights on Delinquency, ed. by K. R. Eissler, London, 1949, p. 15.

48 Francis L. K. Hsu, Blanche G. Watrous and Edith M. Lord, ‘Culture
Pattern and Adolescent Behavior’, Int. J. Soc. Psychiat., Vol. 7, No. 1, Winter
1960-1, pp. 33—53 on p. 45. With the conclusions of this paper might be com-
pared Norman S. Hayner, ‘Social Factors in Oriental Crime’, Amer. J. Sociol.,

Vol. 43, May 1938, pp. 908 ff.

48 P. D. Scott, ‘The Natural History of the Spiv’, in Biology and Human Affairs,

Vol. 20, No. 3, June 1955, pp.1-7.

3 “ Edward Glover, The Roots of Crime, p. 227.

See, e.g., Edwin Powers and Helen Witmer, An Experiment in the Prevention
°f Delinquency, New York, 1951, pp. 38 ff.; D. H. Stott (op. cit. at note 24), p. 5.
ta Re P. roduc ed in Group Problems in Crime and Punishment, p. 135.

M S°cial Science and Social Pathology, p. 118.

^ ce > e 'g-> the definition in Glueck, Family Environment and Delinquency,
P* “^9.

1 Glueck, Unraveling Juvenile Delinquency, pp. 89-90.

C C II— y

737

NOTES TO PAGES 619-625

18 Carr-Saunders, Mannheim, Rhodes, Young Offenders , pp. 109-10.

87 Mannheim and Wilkins, Prediction Methods in relation to Borstal Training

p. 86. S '

88 W. D. Morrison, Juvenile Offenders , New York, 1898, p. 136.

88 Franz Exner, Kriminalbiologie, 1st ed., pp. 276-7.

60 Denis Szabo, Crimes et Villes, pp. 80-1 ; see also Jean Pinatel, Criminoloeie

p. 103. 6

61 On this problem see M. Fortes, Soc. Rev., Vol. 25, ‘1933, p. 158; Social
Aspects of Crime, pp. 273-4; T. Earl Sullenger, Social Determinants in Juvenile
Delinquency, New York, 1936, p. 28, who regards the stepfather as a stronger
factor in delinquency than the stepmother; similarly Exner, Kriminologie, p. 227.

63 C. G. Jung, Contributions to Analytical Psychology, London, 1928, p. 335.
83 John Bowlby, Int. J. Psycho-Anal., Vol. 25, 1944; also separately, London,
1946. See further his Maternal Care and Mental Health, Wld Hlth. Org. Monogr.
Ser., Geneva, 1951. On Bowlby’s work see also Howard Jones, Crime and The
Penal System, 2nd ed., pp. 54-7.

81 Social Science and Social Pathology, Ch. 4.

88 Andiy’s Study has been widely accepted, but criticized by Mary D. Ains-
worth in Deprivation of Maternal Care, Wld. Hlth. Org. Pub. Health Papers, No.
14, Geneva, 1962, p. 116.

88 Siri Naess, Brit. J. Delinq., Vol. 10, No. 1, July 1959, pp. 22-35, and Brit. J.
Crim., Vol. 2, No. 4, April 1962, pp. 361-74.

87 See note 70 above.

88 Jack G. Field, Brit. J. Crim., Vol. 2, No. 4, April 1962, pp. 377-81.

88 S. and E. Glueck, Ventures in Criminology, Ch. 3, London, 1964.

70 John B. Mays, Crime and the Social Structure, London, 1963, p. 79.

71 Bertrand Russell, Education and the Social Order, London, 1956.

72 The Young Delinquent, pp. 1, 507.

73 The Law in relation to the Illegitimate Child. A Report of the Joint Committee
on Psychiatry and the Law appointed by the British Medical Association and
The Magistrates’ Association. Published by the B.M.A., London, 1952. The
section on delinquency was contributed by the present writer.

74 McGregor and Rowntree (op. cit. at note 1 1), pp. 423-4.

78 Claud Mullins, Why Crime? London, 1945, Ch. 4.

78 See The League of Nations study quoted by Mullins, p. 107. Also Exner,
Kriminalbiologie, p. 280.

77 Burt, op. cit., p. 64; Young Offenders, p. 97; Glueck, Unraveling Juvenile
Delinquency, pp. 117-18. For the nineteenth century Morrison (op. cit. at note
58), pp. 119 ff.

78 For Germany Wolf Middendorff, Jugendkriminologie, Ratingen, 1956, pp.
113-14; Exner, op. cit., p. 280. For Sweden Sven Ahnsjo, Delinquency in Girls and
Its Prognosis, 1941, pp. 207 ff.

78 See also Claud Mullins (op. cit. at note 75); Social Aspects of Crime, pp.
276-9; Stott, op. cit., Ch. 13.

80 On ‘Problem Families’ see: The Problem Family, an I.S.T.D. Publication,
London, 1958; Barbara Wootton, Social Science and Social Pathology, pp. 54-62;
Harriett C. Wilson, ‘Juvenile Delinquency in Problem Families in Cardiff’, Brit.
J. Delinq., Vol. 9, No. 2, Oct. 1958, pp. 94-105; the same. Delinquency and Child
Neglect, London, 1962; A. F. Philps and N. Timms, The Problem of the Problem
Family, London, 1957, with extensive bibliog.

81 Dr. T. A. Ratcliffe in I.S.T.D. Publication, p. 11. Critical, T. G. Rankin, pp.
20 ff.; A. F. Philps, pp. 330 ff.

82 Benjamin Schlesinger (ed.), The Multi-Problem Family, Toronto, 1963.

738

NOTES TO PAGES 625-632

63 See above, note 11 (b).

83 See Hans von Hentig, Crime: Causes and Conditions, pp. 269-83 ; Ernst
Roesner, art., ‘Familienstand’ in Handworterbuch der Kriminologie, Vol. 1, pp.
398-414; Stephen Hurvvitz, Criminology, 1952, pp. 347-56; Franz Exner,
Kriminologie, pp. 244-9; on marital adjustment in general: Marshall B. Clinard,
Sociology of Deviant Behavior, Ch. 14.

86 See the details in Roesner, op. cit., pp. 399, 414; Hurvvitz, op. cit., p. 348.

88 McGregor and Rowntree in Society, p. 399.

87 Roesner, op. cit., p. 405; Exner, op. cit., p. 248.

88 Hurvvitz, op. cit., p. 350; Exner, op. cit., p. 248; Roesner, p. 404; von Hentig,
pp. 280-3.

88 D. J. West, The Habitual Prisoner, London, 1963, pp. 20, 45.

80 Norval Morris, The Habitual Criminal, London, 1951, pp. 309, 351.

81 S. and E. Glueck, Later Criminal Careers, New York-London, 1937, pp.
151, 205-6.

83 Norval Morris, op. cit., pp. 352-3.

83 Franz Exner, Kriminologie, p. 245. Against the over-emphasis on ‘biological
selection’ see also Hurvvitz, op. cit., p. 354.

81 Howard Jones, Alcoholic Addiction, London, 1963, Ch. 5.

85 On the role of the School see, e.g., William C. Kvaraceus, Juvenile Delin-
quency and the School, New York-London, 1945; John B. Mays, Education and
the Urban Child, Liverpool, 1962; Sheldon Glueck, The Problem of Delinquency,
Boston, 1959, Ch. 7; Jean Pinatel, Criminologie, Paris, 1963, pp. 98-100; Wolf
Middendorff, Jugendkriminologie, Diisseldorf-Koln, 1956, Ch. 8; Barbara
Wootton, op. cit., pp. 128—35; Hermann Mannheim, Juvenile Delinquency in an
English Middletown, pp. 45-8; Powers and Witmer, Prevention of Delinquency,
Ch. 8; I. Roger Yoshino, ‘Juvenile Delinquency and the School’, in Sociology of
Crime, ed. by Joseph S. Roucek, London, 1962, pp. 217-38.

88 Carr-Saunders et ah. Young Offenders, p. 2.

87 The Young Delinquent, pp. 130-82.

88 Mays, op. cit., p. 89.

88 The same, pp. 70-3. For a detailed critical analysis of ‘Police Juvenile
Liaison Schemes’ see J. A. Mack, Brit. J. Crim., Vol. 3, No. 4, April 1963, pp.
361-75.

100 See also Wootton, op. cit., p. 31 1.

181 Edwin Powers and Helen Witmer, Prevention of Delinquency, p. 33.

182 Ch. 12 and p. 277.

183 Walter C. Reckless and P. P. Shervington, Brit. J. Crim., Vol. 4, No. 1,
July 1963, pp. 7-23.

101 Trenaman (op. cit. at note lib), Chs. 12, 13, 20.

185 Christian Debuyst, Criminels et valeurs vicues, 2nd ed., Louvain, 1960,
Part 3, Ch. 1; Eng. trans. by Nancy Ralli, London, 1965.

186 The Times, 14.1.1963. The figures given by Mays, op. cit., p. 25, for Liver-
pool are still worse. .

107 Walter C. Reckless, The Crime Problem, 2nd ed.. New York, 1955, p. 684.

103 Marshall B. Clinard, Ann. Amer. Acad. Pol. Soc. Sci., Vol. 261, Jan. 1949,

pp. 44-5.

108 Preventing Crime, ed. by Sheldon and Eleanor Glueck, New York-London,
1936, Part 2: School Programmes. Sections on the role of the School in preventive
programmes are contained in most American textbooks on criminology and
juvenile delinquency.

uo Wolf Middendorff, New Forms of Juvenile Delinquency, their Origin,
Prevention and Treatment, U.N.O., New York, 1960, § 4.

73 9

NOTES TO PAGES 632-638

111 See, e.g., W. David Wills, The Hawkspur Experiment, London, 1941, and
The Barns Experiment, London, 1945; the same, Throw away thy Rod, London,
1960; Howard Jones, Reluctant Rebels, London, 1960, with many references.

112 Mays, op. cit., p. 77.

113 T. C. N. Gibbens, Trends in Juvenile Delinquency, Wid. Hlth. Org. Pub.
Health Papers, No. 5, Geneva, 1961, p. 47.

114 1 J. Croft, ‘Juvenile Delinquency and the School’, London University
M.A. (Soc.), Thesis, 1953.

118 Henry T. F. Rhodes, The Criminals We Deserve, London, 1937, p. 231.

116 Kenny-Tumer, Outlines of Criminal Law, 16th ed., London, 1952, p. 289;
Herbert A. Bloch and Gilbert Geis, Man, Crime and Society, pp. 202-4.

117 Kurt Baschwitz, Du und die Masse, Amsterdam, 1938, p. 87. See also
Radbruch and Gwinner, op. cit. above, Ch. 16, Ch. 13.

118 Tony Parker and Robert Allerton, The Courage of his Convictions, pp. 1 87-8.

119 On this subject see, e.g., Max Griinhut, Penal Reform, Oxford, 1948, pp.
231-42; D. L. Howard, The English Prisons, London, 1960. Karl Peters, Grund-
probleme der Kriminalpddagogik, Berlin, 1960, gives a searching and comprehen-
sive discussion of the relevant questions within a wider framework.

Chapter 25

1 General sociological and psychological literature on collective behaviour:
Older: Gustave Le Bon, Psychologic des foules, 1st ed., Paris, 1895, Eng. ed., The
Crowd, London, 1952; Gabriel Tarde, U Opinion et la foule, Paris, 1901 ; Wilfred
Trotter, Instincts of the Herd in Peace and War, London, 1922; Sigmund Freud,
‘Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego’, Collected Works, Vol. 18,
London, 1955 (2nd German ed. 1923); W. McDougall, The Group Mind, New
York, 1920.

More recent: R. T. La Piere, Collective Behavior, New York, 1938; Ogburn-
Nimkoff, A Handbook of Sociology, Ch. 10; Kimball Young, Handbook of Social
Psychology, London, 2nd ed. 1957, 2nd impr. 1960, Ch. 12; H. Cantril, The
Psychology of Social Movements, New York, 1951; Neil J. Smelser, Theory of
Collective Behavior, London, 1962 (with comprehensive bibliog.) ; J. C. Flugel,
Man, Morals and Society, London, 1945, Ch. 13; Joseph B. Gittler, Social
Dynamics, New York, 1952, pp. 84-100; W. J. H. Sprott, Human Groups, Har-
mondsworth, 1948, Ch. 10; George C. Homans, The Human Group, New York-
London, 1951; Peter R. Hofstatter, Gruppendynamik, Hamburg, 1957; Theodor
Geiger, Die Masse und Hire Aktion, Stuttgart, 1926; Arnold M. Rose, Theory
and Method in the Social Sciences, Minneapolis, 1954, Chs. 2, 6, 12 (on the
‘hiatus’ between sociologists and psychologists in their attitudes to group prob-
lems).

8 See Smelser, op. cit., p. 6, on the views of Herbert Biumer.

3 See also Group Problems in Crime and Punishment, pp. 19-27.

4 On this see Michel Trottier, ‘La Complicity criminelle’, Canad. J. Corrections,
Vol. 1, No. 4, July 1959, pp. 56-61 ; Jean Pinatel, Criminologie, pp. 358-63; H.
v. Hentig, Zur Psychologie der Einzeldelikte, Tubingen, Vol. 1, ‘Diebstahl,
Einbruch, Raub’, 1954, pp. 156-9; Vol. 2, ‘Mord’, 1956, Ch. 7; Vol. 3, ‘Betrug’
1957, Ch. 7; Vol. 4, ‘Erpressung’, 1959, Ch. 8.

6 Robert Vouin et Jacques L6aute, Droit Pinal et Criminologie, Paris, 1956,
p. 282. Also Leaute in Revue Penale Suisse, Vol. 72, 1957, pp. 1-19.

6 Law in Eastern Europe No. 3: Federal Criminal Law of the Soviet Union.
Russian Text with an English translation by F. J. Feldbrugge, Introduction by
J. M. van Bemmelen, Leyden, 1959, pp. 10-12, 46-7.

740

NOTES TO PAGES 63S-647

7 Glanviile Williams, Criminal Law, The General Part, 1st ed., London, 1953,
Ch. 6. Also Kenny-Tumer, Outlines of Criminal Law, Ch. 5.

8 This was often the case in the decisions of the German Supreme Court, see,
e.g., Schwarz-Dreher, Strafgesetzbuch, 25th ed., Miinchen-Berlin, 1963, p. 161.

8 v. Hentig, Der Mord, pp. 250-2.

10 This is also true in German law, see Schwarz-Dreher, op. cit., p. 169.

11 See James B. Christoph, Capital Punishment and British Politics, Chicago,
1962, pp. 98-100. Christoph does not mention the crucial words ‘Let them have
it, Chris’, which were apparently vital to the decision of the Court.

17 See, e.g., Glanviile Williams, The Proof of Guilt, 1st ed., London, 1955, pp.
183-9; Hermann Mannheim, Group Problems in Crime and Punishment, p. 281.

13 v. Hentig, Mschr. Kriminol. Strafrechtsreform, Dec. 1962, pp. 193-202,
produces similar case material,

u Irving R. Weiner, Excerpta criminologica, Vol. 4, No. 2, March-April 1964,
pp. 137-55. See also Denis Szabo, ‘L’lnceste en milieu urbain’, L'Annee socio-
logique , vol. 1957-8, pp. 29-93.

15 The Times , 11 and 12.9.1963.

M v. Hentig, Der Mord, pp. 257 ff.

17 See, e.g., the ‘Cleft Chin’ murder case, where an American Army deserter
killed a London taxi driver in the presence of his girl friend who, he alleged, had
told him she wanted to do something exciting, to become a Chicago ‘gun moll’
{The Times, 17-24.1.1945).

18 See, e.g., Criminal Statistics — England and Wales for 1961, p. xxxiii.

18 Thomas Wurtenberger, Der Kantpf gegen das Kunstjalschertum in der
deutschen und schweizerischen Slrafrcchtspfcgc, Wiesbaden, 1951, pp. 36-8.

70 v. Hentig, Diebstahl, p. 156.

71 The Times, 29.3.1961.

77 The Times, 14.3.1963.

73 For English law see the Larceny Act, 1916, s. 33 (1).

74 Glanviile Williams, Criminal Law, 1st ed., p. 224; for French law, Vouin-
Leaut6 {op. cit. at note 5), p. 189.

76 See the cases' in v. Hentig, Erpressung, p. 281.

76 Literature on the Crowd: In addition to the books quoted in note 1 see:
Scipio Sighele, La Foule criminelle, Paris, Bibliothfcque de philosophic contem-
poraine, 1901; Paul Reiwald, Vom Geist der Massen, Zurich, 1946 (Fr. trans.
De Vdsprit des masses, Neufchatel-Paris, 1949); Lionel Penrose, On the Ob-
jective Study of Crowd Behaviour, London, 1952; Neal E. Miller and John
Dollard, Social Learning and Imitation, New Haven, 1945, Chs. 14, 15; E. D.
Martin, The Behavior of Crowds, New York, 1920; George Rud6, The Crowd in
the French Revolution, Oxford, 1959; Gunther Kaiser, Randalierende Jugend,
Heidelberg, 1959.

77 Donald Clemmer, The Prison Community, Boston, 1940, pp. 118, 327; also
p. 120 on the size of the primaiy groups existing in the prison community.

73 The Group Mind, p. 22.

78 See in particular Le Bon, op. cit., Part 1, Chs. 1-3, Part 3, Ch. 2.

30 Ibid., Part 1, Ch. 2.

81 Ibid., Part 1, Ch. 4.

33 Herbert Agar, A Time for Greatness, London, 1943, p. 61.

33 Peter F. Drucker, The End of Economic Man, London, 1939, p. 214.

34 E.g., Martin Buber, Between Man and Man, Paperback ed., London, 1961,
p. 87.

35 See the Report on an Inquiry into the Accident at Bethnal Green Tube Station
Shelter on the 3rd March, 1943, by Laurence R. Dunne (one of the Metropolitan

741

NOTES TO PAGES 647-654

Magistrates), London, H.M.S.O., 1945, Cmd. 6583, and the Report into the
Disaster at the Bolton Wanderers’ Football Gound on the 9th March , 1946, by R.
Moelwyn Hughes, K.C., London, H.M.S.O., 1946, Cmd. 6846.

30 Pinatel, op. cit., pp. 371-2; Ogbum-Nimkoff, op. cit., p. 187; Miller and
Dollard, op. cit., p. 191.

37 Geiger, op. cit., p. 136.

38 C. G. Jung, Essays on Contemporary Events, London, 1947, p. 77;

30 Hofstaetter, op. cit., pp. 13, 17.

40 Murphy and Newcomb, Experimental Social Psychology, rev. ed., New York,
1937, p. 700, fn. 1.

41 F. H. Allport, Social Psychology, Boston, 1924.

12 Miller and Dollard, op. cit., p. 184.

48 Robin M. Williams, Reduction of Intergroup Tensions, Soc. Sci. Res. Counc.
Bull. 57, 1947, p. 60.

44 See, e.g., the case in Allport, Social Psychology, pp. 309-12.

45 Smelser, op. cit., pp. 10, 249-53.

48 Geiger, op. cit., pp. 147 If. Against him Reiwald, op. cit.

47 Geiger, op. cit., p. 150.

48 Smelser, op. cit., p. 254.

48 Rud6, op. cit., pp. 219-21.

50 Ibid., pp. 235-7.

51 Kaiser, op. cit., pp. 60 ff.

83 Ibid., pp. 72, 172 ff.

53 Chicago Commission on Race Relations: The Negro in Chicago, Chicago,
1922, pp. 22-5.

64 Fyvel, The Insecure Offenders, pp. 242 If.

85 Smelser, op. cit., pp. 236-7, deals with them briefly, but his book is con-
cerned not only with crowds, but with collective behaviour in general.

86 Group Problems in Crime and Punishment, pp. 183-5.

87 Prison J. ( Amer .), Vol. 33, No. 1, April 1953, p. 17.

88 Report on Disturbances at the Carlton Approved School on 28th and 30th
August, 1959 by Mr. Victor Durand, Q.C., London, H.M.S.O., 1960, Cmd.
937.

89 See, e.g., The Times, 18.1, 19.2.1949 (Durban riots between Africans and
Indians); New Statesman, 29.1.1949.

00 See, e.g., The Times, 28.7.1948 (Alexandria riots).

81 Report of a Commission of Inquiry into Disturbances in British Guiana in
February, 1962, Colonial Office No. 354; The Times, 4.10.1962.

02 E.g., by a Labour M.P., J. P. W. Mallalieu, Q.C., in the New Statesman,
11.7.1959.

63 Letters in The Times, 4.9.1958.

84 Ibid., 16.9.1958.

88 Ibid., 20, 21.5.1959. Nevertheless occasional riots did occur in other towns
a few years after the passing of those sentences, e.g. in Dudley, see The Times, I,

13.8.1962, but firm police action prevented large-scale injuries and damage.

86 E.g., The Times, 5.9.1958.

87 Home Office Write Papers, Commonwealth Immigrants Act, 1962, Cmd.
2151, October, 1963, and Report of Commonwealth Immigrants Advisory Council,
Cmd. 2119, July 1963. See also The Times, 5.10.1963.

88 The Times, 5.6.1959.

89 See the article by Philip Mason, the Director of the Institute, in The Times,

27.9.1963.

70 In his important article in Temple Law Quart., Vol. 19, No. 4, April 1946,

742

NOTES TO PAGES 654-655

pp. 371-89, Robert H. Jackson, the chief American Prosecutor at the Nuremberg
Trial, wrote: ‘No system of jurisprudence has yet evolved any satisfactory tech-
nique for handling a great multitude of common charges against a multitude of
accused persons.’

» On this trial there is a considerable literature; here it will suffice to refer to
the article by Dean Erwin Griswold of the Harvard Law School, The Times,
25.9.1958, and to The Times of the 20, 21, 22.12.1956.

72 Kenny-Tumer, Outlines of Criminal Law, 16th ed., Cambridge, 1952,
§8437-41.

75 Kenny-Tumer, op. cit., §439. On the Gordon Riots see further, Leon
Radzinowicz, History of English Criminal Law, Vol. 3, London, 1956, p. 89, and
especially Christopher Hibbert, King Mob, London, 1958. According to Rad-
zinowicz, 134 persons were charged (out of a crowd of many thousands), of whom
58 were found guilty and 25 executed; among those found guilty may have been
some mere spectators; see also Radzinowicz, op. cit., Vol, 1, p. 170, fn. 25.

7 ‘ Kenny-Tumer, op. cit., § 430.

74 The Times, 16.2.1957, 29.12.1958, 8.1.1959.

74 The Times, 28.9.1956. For further details of that interesting trial see The
Times, 6.8, 10.10, 11.10.1956.

77 Literature on Organized Crime.

(1) Mainly on Adult Gangs

(a) Historical: Gustav Radbruch und Heinrich Gwinner, Geschichte des Ver-
brechens, Stuttgart, 1951 ; Luke Owen Pike, A History of Crime in England (see
Ch. 19, note 11); Ronald Fuller, The Beggar's Brotherhood, London, 1936.

(b) Contemporary: Herbert A. Bloch and Gilbert Geis, Man, Crime and Society,
New York, 1962, Ch. 9; Alfred R. Lindesmith in Ann. Amer. Acad. Polit. Soc.
Sci., Vol. 217, Sept. 1941, pp. 119-27; Estes Kefauver, Crime in America, London,
1952; Donald R. Taft, Criminology, Ch. 13; George B. Void, Theoretical Crim-
inology, 1958, Ch. 12; Earl Johnson, ‘Organized Crime: Challenge to the Ameri-
can Legal System’, J. crim. Law Criminal Police Sci., Vol. 53, No. 4, Dec. 1962,
Vol. 54, Nos. 1 and 2, March and June 1963 (with excellent bibliographical
notes); Daniel Bell, ‘Crime as an American Way of Life’, Antioch Rev., Vol. 13,
June 1953, reprinted in Wolfgang, Savitz, Johnston, The Sociology of Crime and
Delinquency, New York, 1962, Ch. 29; Walter C. Reckless, The Crime Problem,
3rd cd.. New York, 1960, Chs. 9, 10; Hans v. Hentig, Der Gangster, Berlin-
Gottingen-Heidelberg, 1959; W. Naucke, ‘Methodenfragen zum “Typ” des
Gewohnheitsverbrechers’, Mschr. Kriminol. Strafrechtsreform, Vol. 45, Nos. 3-4,
Aug. 1962, pp. 84-97; John B. Mays, Crime and the Social Structure, London,
1963, Ch. 12; Jean Pinatel, Criminologie, Paris, 1963, pp. 296-302. Now in par-
ticular the excellent American symposium, ‘Combatting Organized Crime’, ed.
by Gus Tyler, Ann. Amer. Acad. Pol. Soc. Sci., Vol. 347, May 1963. In the Sunday
Times of the 14.2.1965 an analysis of the Great Train Robbery of August, 1963,
is given. Also Peta Fordham, The Robbers' Tale, London, 1965.

(c) On the Mafia: Frederick Sondem, Brotherhood of Evil: The Mafia, New
York, 1959; Francis M. Guercio, Sicily, 2nd ed., London, 1954, Ch. 5; E. J.
Hobsbawm, Social Bandits and Primitive Rebels, Glencoe, 111., and Manchester,
1959, Ch. 3; Giovanni Lo Schiavo, The Truth about the Mafia, New York, 1962,
and notes 103 and 104 below.

(2) Mainly on Adolescent Gangs

Frederick Thrasher, The Gang, Chicago, 1st ed., 1927, 2nd ed., 1936; William
F. Whyte, Street Corner Society, 2nd ed., Chicago, 1955; Cloward and Ohlin,
Delinquency and Opportunity, and Albert K. Cohen, Delinquent Boys (see above,
Ch. 22, note 16); David J. Bordua, ‘A Critique of Sociological Interpretation of

743

NOTES TO PAGES 656-663

Gang Delinquency’, Am. Amer. Acad. Pol. Soc. Sci., Vol. 338, Nov. 1961, pp.
120-36 (reprinted in Wolfgang et al., Ch. 39); Harrison E. Salisbury. The Shook -
Up Generation , London, 1959; Lewis Yablonsky, The Violent Gang, New York,
1962; Reaching the Fighting Gang, New York City Youth Board, New York,
1960; Peter Scott, ‘Gangs and Delinquent Groups in London’, Brit. J. Delinq.,
Vol. 7, No. 1, July 1956, pp. 4-26 (with bibliog.); M. L. Turner and J. C. Spencer,
‘Spontaneous Youth Groups and Gangs’, in Spontaneous Youth Groups, ed. by
P. H. K. Kuenstler, London, 1955 ; Lloyd T. Delany, Brit. J. Delinq., Vol. 5, No.
1, July 1954, pp. 34 ff., with Commentary by John Spencer; La ddlinquance des
jeunes en groupe, Centre de Formation et de Recherche de l’Education Sur-
vcillde, Vaucresson, Paris, 1963.

78 See Preventive Detention: Report of the Home Office Advisory Council on the
Treatment of Offenders, H.M.S.O., 1963, pp. 26-7; W. H. Hammond and Edna
Chaycn, Persistent Criminals, H.M.S.O., 1963 ; D. J. West, The Habitual Prisoner,
London, 1963. Sec also the reviews of these publications in Brit. J. Crim., Vol. 4,
No. 1, Oct. 1963, pp. 181 ff.

70 § 20a of the German Penal Code and § 85 of the Draft Code of 1962;
Joachim Hcllmer, Mschr. Kriminol. Strafrcchtsrcform, Vol. 43, No. 5-6, Nov.
1960, pp. 145-6, and more fully in Der Gewohnheitsverbrecher and die Sichertmgs-
verwahrung, 1934-45, Berlin, 1961.

80 John A. Mack, ‘Full-time Miscreants, Delinquent Neighbourhoods and
Criminal Networks’, Brit. J. Sociol., Vol. 15, No. 1, March 1964, pp. 38-53.

81 D. J. West, The Habitual Prisoner, London, 1962.

82 Sec Group Problems in Crime and Punishment, pp. 113-14.

82 ‘London Lorry Gangs Moving Out’, The Times, 2.2.1963.

84 F. H. McClintock and Evelyn Gibson, Robbery in London, London, 1961,
pp. 107 ff.

85 The Times, 31.10.1963.

88 Radbruch-Gwinner, op. cit., Chs. 6, 7, 9.

87 Ibid., Chs. 19, 24, 27.

88 Droit pinal et criminologic, p. 291.

80 Jerome Hall, Theft, Law and Society, 2nd ed., Indianapolis, 1952, p. 72.

80 On Wat Tyler, sec also John Richard Green, A Short History of the English
People, 1929 ed., London, pp. 252-3.

01 Kefauver (op. cit. above at note 77), pp. 24, 27 ff.

02 Bloch and Geis, op. cit., pp. 247-8; also Walter C. Reckless, The Crime
Problem, p. 201.

02 Gucrcio (op. cit. at note 77), p. 15.

01 The Times, 29.7.1957, and also The Leopard, Ch. 4.

05 The Times, 13.3.1963, and Danilo Dolci, op. cit.

08 See, e.g., the Observer, 6.10.1963.

97 v. Hentig, Der Gangster, p. 4.

08 v. Hentig, op. cit., p. 7, referring to J. Edgar Hoover, Persons in Hiding,
Boston, 1938, pp. 94 ff.

99 On Merton see above, Ch. 22, s. 1. William F. Whyte, Street Comer Society,
2nd ed. 1953, Chs. 4, 5, 6.

199 The Times, 18.11.1957.

191 Johnson (op. cit. at note 77), Vol. 53, p. 403.

192 Ibid., p. 402.

ao3 Nonnan Lewis, The Honoured Society, London, 1964.

104 Carmelo Nobile, ‘Su talune esigenze psicho-igicniche della lotta contro la
mafia’, Quad. Criminol. clin., Anno 5, No. 4, Oct. 1963, pp. 461-74.

198 Ibid., p. 401.

744

NOTES TO PAGES 663-671

i« E.g., Lindesmitli (op. cit. at note 77), p. 120; Johnson, op. cit., pp. 412 ff.;
Kcfauver Report throughout.

107 Lindesmith, op. cit., p. 119.

10s Reckless, The Crime Problem, p. 179.

109 For a popular account of the work of those organizations see Henry T. F.
Rhodes, The Criminals We Deserve, London, 1937, pp. 57, 237, and Chs. 8, 11.

110 Letter to The Times, 4.7.1956.

™ Ibid., 21.6.1956.

175 Ibid., 3 . 7 . 1956 .

119 Jack ‘Spot’ Comer, the Sunday Times, 6.10.1963.

«« The Times, 26.7.1962.

110 Johnson, op. cit., Vol. 53, pp. 407-8, explains the decrease in violence as a
consequence of the decline in inter-gang warfare and the consolidation of power
in the hands of a few large criminal organizations.

116 C. H. Rolph, ‘London’s New Gangsters’, the Hew Statesman, 21.5.1960.

117 Thrasher, op. cit., Ch. 3.

118 Gerrard, ‘The Core Member of the Gang’, Brit. J. Crim., Vol. 4, No. 4,
April 1964, pp. 361-71.

119 M. L. Turner, Ship Without Sails, London, 1953; John C. Spencer, ‘The
Unclubbable Adolescent’, Brit. J. Deling., Vol. 1, 1950, pp. 113-24.

150 Anthony Forder, review of Cloward and Ohlin, Case Conference, May
1962.

131 Group Problems in Crime and Punishment, p. 135.

133 See, e.g., S. and E. Glueck, Unraveling Juvenile Delinquency, p. 164. No
distinction as yet in Young Offenders, 1944, p. 110, but in Juvenile Delinquency in
an English Middletown, London, 1948, pp. 39-40, ‘real gangs’ are distinguished
from ‘gangs’ in the traditional sense.

133 Juvenile Delinquents Grown Up, New York, 1940, p. 181. See also Ruth
Topping in S. Glueck, The Problem of Delinquency, Boston, 1959, pp. 844-9.

131 See, e.g., The Times, 9.9.1958, on the position in Glasgow, where Protestant
and Roman Catholic factions were involved. Similar scenes were reported from
Belfast on the occasion of a match between an Irish and an Italian team. The
Times, 5.12.1957.

135 Literature on Victimology. Hans v. Hentig, The Criminal and his Victim,
Part 4, New Haven, 1949 ; the same in Der Mord, Ch. 8 ; Der Betrug, Ch. 8 ; Die
Erpressung, Ch. 9; Marvin E. Wolfgang, Patterns in Criminal Homicide, Phila-
delphia, 1958, Parts 2 and 3; J. P. Morris and Louis Blom-Cooper, A Calendar
of Murder, London, 1964, Ch. 7; Jean Pinatel, Criminologie, pp. 345-50;
Edgar Lcnz, Der Betrogcne, Hamburg, 1 961; Paul Comil, ‘Contribution de la
“Victimologie” aux sciences criminologiques’. Rev. Droit pin. Criminol., April
1959; B. Mendelsohn, ‘Victimologie’, Rev. inf. Criminol. Police Tech., Vol. 10,
No. 2, April-June 1956; the same, ‘The Victimology’, Etud. int. Psycho-Soc.
crim.. No. 1, July-Sept. 1956, pp, 23-36; Henri Ellenberger, ‘Psychological
Relationships between Criminal and Victim’, Arch. crim. Psychodyn., Vol. 1, No.
2, Spring 1955, pp. 257-90 ; California Sexual Deviation Research, State of
California Department of Mental Hygiene and Langley Porter Clinic: Study of
Sex Crimes against Children, Report of Jan. 1953, pp, 47-84, Final Report,
March 1954, Summary, pp, 59—63 ; H. Schultz, Rev. pen. suisse, 1958, Vol. 71,
pp. 171-91; Cambridge Report on Sexual Offences, London, 1957, Ch. 6; W. H.
Nagel, ‘Victimologie’, T. Strafr., Vol. 68, 1959, pp. 1-26.

133 Kenny-Tumer, Outlines of Criminal Law, § 117.

J * 7 See Criminal Justice and Social Reconstruction, pp. 13-17.

138 Kenny-Tumer, op. cit., §§ 130, 156. The German Penal Code, § 226a, now

745

NOTES TO PAGES 671-677

contains a special provision to this effect; see the commentary by Dreher on this
provision, which has also been taken over by the new German Draft Code of
1962 (see its § 152 and the detailed discussion, pp. 286-88).

129 Criminal Justice, p. 121.

130 If we should accept the rather tortuous arguments of Hannah Arendt,
Eichmann in Jerusalem, London, 1964, the Jewish leaders would be almost
as guilty as Eichmann of the destruction of European Jewry. Against her argu-
ments see, in particular, the unsigned review in The Times Literary Supplement .
30.4.1964.

131 Walter C. Reckless, The Crime Problem, Ch. 3.

182 See also Social Aspects of Crime in England, p. 194.

133 See v. Hentig, Der Mord, p. 277.

131 The Criminal and His Victim, pp. 419-50.

135 A provision of this kind is contained, e.g., in 220a of the German Penal
Code, which was added to the Code in 1954 in conformity with the Genocide
Convention of 1948 (reproduced in Donnelly, Goldstein and Schwartz, Criminal
Law, p. 965).

138 For a case of this kind see The Times, 22.1.1963.

137 ‘Techniques of Neutralization’, Amer. SocioL Rev., Vol. 22, Dec. 1957, pp.
664-70 (reprinted in Wolfgang-Savitz-Johnston, The Sociology of Crime and
Delinquency, No. 34).

138 T. C. N. Gibbens and Joyce Prince, Child Victims of Sex Offences, London,
1963.

130 Henry T. F. Rhodes, The Criminals We Deserve, p. 209.

140 See Social Aspects of Crime, pp. 191 ff.

141 Compensation for Victims of Crimes of Violence, London, H.M.S.O., June
1961, Cmd. 1406, p. 11; Compensation for Victims of Crimes of Violence. A
Report by ‘Justice’, London, 1962; Gordon Rose, Brit. J. Crim., Vol. 3, No. 4,
April 1963, pp. 396-7. Another Home Office White Paper (Cmd. 2323) on the
subject was published in Spring, 1964, and at the time of writing an ‘experimental
Scheme’ is in operation, under which a considerable number of small awards,
totalling over £11,000 in the first six months, have been made by the recently
established ‘Criminal Injuries Compensation Board’ (see The Times, 7.2.1965 and
on the whole scheme Bernard W. M. Downey, ‘Compensating Victims of
Violent Crime’ Brit. J. Crim., Vol. 5, No. 1, Jan. 1965, pp. 92 ff.).

Chapter 26

1 On the age factor: Criminal Statistics England and Wales ; Howard Jones,
Crime and the Penal System, 2nd ed., London, 1962, pp. 123-7; A. Besson et al.,
Seuils d'Age et Legislation pinale, Paris, 1961; Ernst Roesner, Handworterbuch
der Kriminologie, Vol. 1, pp. 23-35; Alfred-Johannes Rangol, ‘Die Straffalligkeit
nach Hauptdeliktsgruppen und Altersklassen, 1884-1948’, Mschr. Kriminol.
Strafrechtsreform, Vol. 45, Nos. 5-6, Oct. 1962, pp. 158 ff.; Gianluigi Ponti,
‘Studio statistico sulla Criminality senile’, Quad. Criminol. clin., Vol. 4, No. 2,
April- June 1962, pp. 145-78; H. Burger-Prinz and H. Lewrenz, Die Alters-
kriminalitat, Stuttgart, 1961; C. Amelunxen, Die Alterskriminalitdt, Hamburg,
1960; Bruno M. Cormier et al., Canad. J. Corrections, Vol. 3, No. 1, Jan. 1961,
pp. 2 ff, 51 ff; Barbara Wootton, Social Science and Social Pathology, Ch. 5;
Social Problems of Post War Youth, Econ. Res. Counc., London, Jan. 1956;
Leslie T. Wilkins, Delinquent Generations, Home Office Studies in the Causes of
Delinquency and the Treatment of Offenders, No. 3, London, H.M.S.O., 1960;
G. Prys Williams, Patterns of Teenage Delinquency England and Wales, 1946-61,

146

NOTES TO PAGES 679-684

Christ. Econ. Soc. Res. Found., London, Oct. 1962; A. A. Walters (review of
Wilkins), Brit. J. Crim., Vol, 3, No. 4, April 1963, pp. 391-5, and Wilkins’s re-
joinder in Vol. 4, No. 3, Jan. 1964, pp. 264-8.

1 Tadashi Uematsu, ‘Criminality in Japan Observed from the Points of Age
and Sex’, Ann. Hitotsubashi Acad., Vol. 9, No. 1, Oct. 1958, p. 79.

2 Rangoi, op. cit., pp. 159-60.

4 Vouin-Liaute, op. c/7., p. 301.

6 Selosse in Besson, op. cit., p. Ill, and the table, pp. 116-17.

« Ponti, op. cit., p. 150; and now The Measurement of Delinquency (see above,
Ch. 5, note 1).

J Ronald H. Beattie, /. crim. Law Crtminol. Police Sci., Vol. 51, No. 1, May-
June 1960, p. 64. Also Sellin, Ann. Amer. Acad. Pol. Soc. Sci., Jan. 1962, pp. 1 1-24;
Negley K. Teeters and John Otto Reinemann, The Challenge of Delinquency, New
York, 1950, pp. 15-16. The newly founded ‘Center of Criminological Research’
of the University of Pennsylvania is making special efforts to establish a reliable
‘index of delinquency’; see Constructing an Index of Delinquency. A Manual, pub-
lished by the Center, Oct. 1963, and now Thorsten Sellin and Marvin E. Wolf-
gang, The Measurement of Delinquency, New York, 1964.

8 Thorsten Sellin, The Criminality of Youth, Philadelphia, 1940, pp. 50-1
67.

9 Walter C. Reckless, Criminal Behavior, p. 103.

10 Mary Stevenson Callcott, Russian Justice, New York, 1935, p. 62.

11 H. v. Hentig, Crime: Its Causes and Conditions, p. 130.

12 See, e.g., the correspondence in The Times, 30.10, 2.11, 13.11.1962.

13 Norwood East, The Adolescent Criminal, London, 1942, p. 15.

14 Ernst Kretschmer, Physique and Character, 21st/22nd. ed., London, 1955,
pp. 340-1.

15 Some writers take it for granted that, with improved health and nutrition,
the age of the onset of puberty has steadily declined; the mean onset of men-
struation for girls, a century ago at 17, is now given as 13£; see G. M. Carstairs,
This Island Now, London, 1963, pp. 49-50; Gerald Gardiner, The Times, 1 2.9.1963.
This view has, however, been strongly contested by other authorities.

18 Social Aspects of Crime in England, p. 80.

17 Criminal Statistics England and Wales, 1962, p. xi.

18 Joachim Heilmer, Der Gewohnheitsverbrecher und die Sicherungsvenvahrung
1934-1945, Berlin, 1961, p. 1 16.

19 Criminal Statistics, 1962, pp. xv-xix. See also F. H. McCIintock, Crimes of
Violence, London, 1963, pp. 98-9 and App. XI.

20 Sexual Offences: Report of the Cambridge Department of Criminal Science,
London, 1957, pp. 113-15; J. H. Fitch, Brit. J. Crim., Vol. 3, No. 1, July 1962,
p. 19; Prison Commissioners' Report for 1959, pp. 178-9.

21 Social Aspects, p. 371.

52 W. H. Hammond and Edna Chayen, Persistent Criminals, H.M.S.O., Lon-
don, 1963, p. 111.

55 See note 26 below.

24 See, e.g., McCIintock and Gibson, Robbery in London, p. 46.

25 S. and E. Giueck , Later Criminal Careers, New York, 1937, Ch. 10.

28 S. and E. Glueck, Juvenile Delinquents Grown Up, New York, 1940, Ch. 8,
and After-Conduct of Discharged Offenders, London, 1945, pp. 80 ff.

27 After-Conduct, p. 84; Juvenile Delinquents Grown Up, p. 97.

28 E.g., by Howard Jones, Crime and the Penal System, 2nd ed., p. 126.

* Erwin Frey, Der Friihkriminelle Riickfallsverbrecher ( Criminalitd pricoce et
Recidivisme), Basel, 1951, pp. 62 ff., 72 ff. See also my review of this book in

747

NOTES TO PAGES 684-690

Group Problems , pp. 139-46, and on the whole question Barbara Wootton
Social Science and Social Pathology, London, 1959, pp.165 ff.

30 Sec, e.g Juvenile Delinquency in an English Middletown, p. 81 ; Social Aspects
of Crime, pp. 80-1.

31 Mannheim and Wilkins, Prediction Methods in relation to Borstal Training,
p. 65.

32 Juvenile Delinquents Grown Up, p. 21 1.

33 Hammond and Chayen (op. cit. at note 22), p. 28.

31 Sir George Benson, Bril. J. Dclinq., Vol. 3, No. 3, Jan. 1953, pp.' 198-202,
Vol. 5, No. 2, Oct. 1954, pp. 138-43; R. S. Taylor, Brit. J. Crim., Vol. 1, No. 1,
July 1960, pp. 22-3 ; D. J. West, The Habitual Prisoner, Cambridge, 1963, pp. 84,
96; Norval Morris, The Habitual Criminal, London, 1961, pp. 301, 339; Barbara
Wootton, op. cit., pp. 159 ff.

36 Yoshitsugu Baba and Tsugio Nakano, Some Observation of Recidivism in
Japan, ( no year), p. 21.

30 Roland Grassbcrger, Die Losung kriminalpolitischer Problemc durch die
mechanische Statistik, Vienna, 1946, esp. p. 83. This part of Grassberger’s im-
portant work has been well summarized in English by Thorsten Scllin, ‘Recid-
ivism and Maturation’, Nat. Probat. Parole Assoc. J., July 1958, pp. 241-50,
where he also reproduces the findings of several Swedish studies, which all con-
firm the close relationship between age at first conviction and likelihood and
speed of relapse.

37 Tony Parker, The Unknown Citizen, London, 1963, pp. 66, 129.

38 Some of them were discussed 45 years ago in the present writer’s paper
Rechtsgcfiihl und Dichtung (see above, note 7, Ch. 16).

30 The Times, 13.1.1962.

10 This is stressed by Biirgcr-Prinz and Lewrcnz, op. cit., Ch. 5.

111 See note 1 above.

42 On the Sex Factor: Ccsarc Lombroso and G. Ferrero, La donna delinquente,
la prostituta e la donna normale, Torino, 1893, Eng. ed. The Female Offender,
London, 1895; Pauline Tamowsky, Etude anthropometrique sur les prostitutes et
les volcuses, Paris, 1889; also Les femmes homicides, Paris, 1908; Johanna C.
Hudig, De Criminalitcit dcr Vrouw, Utrecht-Nijmegen, 1940; Hermann Mann-
heim, Social Aspects of Crime in England between the Wars, London, 1940, Ch.
1 1 ; Stephan Hurwitz, Criminology, pp. 269-79; Mabel E. Elliott, Crime in Modern
Society, New York, 1952, Chs. 8, 9; Otto Poliak, The Criminality of Women,
Philadelphia, 1950; Hans v. Hentig, Crime: Its Causes and Condition, New York,
1947, Ch. 5; J. M. van Bemmelcn, Kriminologie, 3rd ed., Zwolle, 1952, Ch. 11;
Wolf Middendorff, Soziologie des Verbrechens, Diisscldorf-Koln, 1959, pp. 248-
256; ‘The Female Offender’, N.P.P.A. Journal, Vol. 3, No. 1, Jan. 1957; S. and
E. Glueck, Five Hundred Delinquent Women, New York, 1934; Ernst Roesner and
Max Hagcmann in Handworterbuch der Kriminologie, Vol. 1, 1933, pp. 574-95,
and Vol. 2, 1 936, pp. 1049-63 ; Jean Pinatel, Criminologie, Paris, 1 963, pp. 154 ff. ;
Sebastian von Koppenfcls, Die Kriminalitat der Frau im Kriege, Leipzig, 1926;
Leon Radzinowicz, ‘Sex Rates of Criminality’, Sociol. Rev., Vol. 29, Jan. 1937
(Polish material); Grace W. Pailthorpe, Studies in the Psychology of Delinquency,
Medical Research Council, H.M.S.O., London, 1932; Hedwig, Schwarz, ‘The
Psycho-Analysis of a Case of Stealing, Brit. J. Delinq., Vol. 1, No. 1, July 1950,
pp. 29-44; Phyllis Epps, ‘A Preliminary Survey of 300 Female Delinquents in
Borstal Institutions’, Brit. J. Delinq., Vol. 1, No, 3, Jan. 1951, pp. 187-97; the
same, ‘A Further Survey of Female Delinquents Undergoing Borstal Training’,
Brit. J. Delinq., Vol. 4, No. 4, April 1954, pp. 265-71 ; the same, ‘Women Shop-
lifters in Holloway Prison’, in T. C. N. Gibbens and Joyce Prince, Shoplifting,

748

NOTES TO PAGES 690-702

Ch. 14, London, 1962, 1.S.T.D. ; Moya Woodside, ‘Women Drinkers in Holloway
Prison’, Brit. J. Crim., Vol. 1, No. 3, Jan. 1961, pp. 221-35; Ann D. Smith,
Women in Prison, London, 1962, Chs. 1, 2.

« See Social Aspects of Crime, pp. 336-7.

44 Barbara Wootton, op. cit., pp. 31-2, 318.

« Freud, in Totem and Taboo, p. 21, quotes from Sir James Frazer an instance
oft ho same presumption of coercion in a New South Wales tribe.

44 On this and similar provisions in other foreign codes see H. H. Heldmann,
Mschr. Kriminol. Strafrechtsreform, Vol. 40, Nos. 3-4, June 1957, pp. 86-104.

45 See Criminal Justice and Social Reconstruction, p. 77.

44 § 376 of the Draft Code.

44 Poliak, op. cit., Ch. 1 : ‘The Masked Character of Female Crime’.

»v. Iientig, Zur Psychologie der Einzeldelikte, Vol. 4: ‘Die Erpressung’,
Tiibingen, 1949, pp. 220 ff.

41 Social Aspects of Crime, p. 344.

43 Reckless in N.P.P.A. Journal, p. 1.

13 Criminal Statistics for 1961, p. 32.

54 See, e.g., Social Aspects of Crime, pp. 342-4; Criminal Statistics for 1961,
pp. 40-1 ; Poliak, op. cit., pp. 3-5.

44 Ann D. Smith, op. cit., pp. 188, 194; Maya Woodside, op. cit., p. 235.

44 B.M.A., London, 1946, p. 10.

4T Report of the Committee on Children and Young Persons, H.M.S.O., London,
Oct. 1960, Cmd., 1191, pp. 130-2.

41 See, e.g., H. von Hcntig, Die Strafe, Vol. 1, Berlin, 1954, pp. 122 ff.

44 Ann D. Smith, op. cit., p. 57.

40 Radbruch-Gwinner, Geschichte des Verbrechens, Ch. 15, esp. p. 158;
Wallace Notestcin, A History of Witchcraft in England 1558-1718, Washington,
1911.

41 Kurt Baschwitz, Hexen und Hexenprozesse , Munchen, 1963.

41 L. O. Pike, A History of Crime in England, London, 1873-6, Vol. 1, pp.
255-6.

” Radbruch-Gwinner, op. cit., Ch. 9, esp. p. 94.

44 On this and the following text see Radbruch-Gwinner, op. cit., Ch. 22.

44 See Frances Mossiker, The Queen's Necklace, London, 1961, and on this
and the case of the Marquise de Brinviliiers Henri Robert, Lcs grands proebs
d'histoirc, Paris, 1923-35.

44 War and Crime, London, 1941, pp. 116-20.

*' Jean Pinatel, Criminologie, p. 155.

44 Reckless in N.P.P.A. Journal, p. 2.

44 See above. Preliminary Observations to Part 3.

70 Report of the Children’s Department, Home Office, H.M.S.O., 1964,

71 £•£•> Poliak, op. cit., pp. 123-5.

53 E.g., Gibbens, Brit. J. Delinq., Vol. 10, No. 2, Oct. 1959, pp. 81-103.

” Epps, Brit. J. Delinq., Vol. 1, p. 150.

74 T. C. N. Gibbens and Joyce Prince, Shoplifting, p. 66.

” Scipio Sighele, La foule criminelle, 2nd ed., Paris, 1901, pp. 97-8.

4 C. Lombroso and G. Ferrero, La donna delinquente, la prostituta e la donna
normale, Torino, 1893, Eng. ed. The Female Offender, London, 1895. On this
work sec Marvin E. Wolfgang in Pioneers in Criminology, pp. 190-2, 202.

‘ Against this view rightly S. and E. Glueck, Five Hundred Delinquent Women,
New York, 1934, p. 307.

74 Gibbens and Prince, op. cit., p. 126.

14 Alexandre Dumas, op. cit.

749

NOTES TO PAGES 702-708

80 Gunnar Myrdal, An American Dilemma, New York-London, 1944 nn

237-62. ’

81 Mary Stevenson Callcott {op. cit. at note 10), p. 62.

88 See also Middendorff, op. cit., p. 251, who gives the sex ratio for perjury in
Germany as 1 : 3.

83 See, e.g., F. H. Allport, Institutional Behavior, Ch. 18.

84 Murphy-Murphy-Newcomb, Experimental Social Psychology, New York-
London, p. 71.

86 The Young Delinquent, pp. 299-300.

80 Ibid., Ch. 2, esp. Table 17 and pp. 491-2.

87 Burt, op. cit., pp. 470, 491 ; S. and E. Glueck, Family Environment and
Delinquency, p. 207.

88 Hugh Hartshorne and Mark A. May, Studies in Deceit, New York, 1930, Vol.
1, p. 177, On this study see also Group Problems in Crime and Punishment, p. 21.

80 Poliak, op. cit., pp. 9-12.

00 W. and M. T. Healy, ‘Pathological Lying, Accusation and Swindling’,
Crim. Sci. Monogr. No. 1 (Supplement to J. Amer. Inst. crim. Law Criminol),
London, 1915.

01 Karl Mannheim, Man and Society in an Age of Reconstruction, London,
1940, p. 156.

02 Johanna C. Hudig {op. cit. at note 42), p. 257.

03 W. Norwood East, The Adolescent Criminal, London, 1942, p. 300.

64 Willem A. Bonger, Criminality and Economic Conditions, Boston, 1916.

05 For the following see Mabel A. Elliott and Francis E. Merrill, Social Dis-
organization, 4th ed.. New York, 1961, Ch. 9.

00 Richard M. Titmuss, Essays on 'The Welfare State', London, 1958, p. 102.

07 See The Times, 29.11, 8.12.1962, 22.1.1963 (Court of Criminal Appeal).

08 Albert K. Cohen, Delinquent Boys, pp. 44, 137 IF. In a small but useful piece
of research Ruth R. Morris, Brit. J. Crim., Vol. 5, 1965, has undertaken to prove
that the differential sex rate is due to the ‘different sex role objectives for boys and
girls . . . Society provides more cultural and sub-cultural support for male than
female delinquency.’ There is more tolerance for male than for female delinquency.
It may be doubted whether this is generally true. One can often observe a greater
reluctance on the part of representatives of society to charge girls before a
juvenile court than there would be in the case of boys.

09 A. Quetelet, Recherclies sur le penchant au crime, 1838, p. 38 ; A. v. Oettingen,
Die Moralstatistik in Hirer Bedeutung fiir eine Sozialethik, 3rd ed., Erlangen, 1882,
p. 526, fn. 2. Also Gabriel Tarde, Philosophic penale, 4th ed., 1895, p. 379, fn. 1.

100 L. S. Penrose, Brit. J. med. Psychol. 1939, vol. 18, p. 9. A. F. Tredgold,
Mental Deficiency, 9th ed., London, 1956, p. 18, reproduces material from the
Report of the Committee of 1924, showing that at the time the proportion of
mental defective males was 9-21 per 1,000 against 7-97 of females.

101 London, H.M.S.O., 1957, Cmd. 169, p. 310.

102 W. and M. T. Healy, ‘Pathological Lying, Accusation and Swindling’
(cited at note 90 above).

103 D. IC. Henderson, Mental Abnormality and Crime, English Studies in Crime
Science, ed. by L. Radzinowicz and J. W. C. Turner, London, 1944, p. 116.

104 Op. cit. at note 34 above.

105 T. C. N. Gibbens and Joyce Prince, op. cit., pp. 63-4.

108 Edward Glover, The Roots of Crime, p, 261.

107 Annual Report of the Prison Commissioners for 1961, pp. 144-5.

i°b Preventive Detention: Report of Home Office Advisory Council on the Treat-
ment of Offenders , 1963, pp. 34-5.

750

Appendix

I. SOCIETIES

The Howard League for Penal Reform, 6 Endsleigh St., London, W.C.l.
The British Society of Criminology, c/o The I.S.T.D., 8 Bourdon St.,
Davies St., W.l.

The British Sociological Association, 13 Endsleigh St., W.C.I.

The National Association of Probation Officers, 6 Endsleigh St., W.C.l.
Union nationale des Associations pour la Sauvegarde de l’Enfance et de
l’Adolescence, 28 Place St. Georges, Paris 9.

The International Society of Criminology, 28 Avenue de Friedland, Paris,
Vllle.

The International Society of Social Defence, c/o Count Filippo Gramatica,
Genoa, Italy.

Deutsche Kriminologischc Gesellschaft, c/o Kriminalistik, Hamburg 1,
Schopenstehl 15, West Germany.

Deutsche Vereinigung fiir Jugendgerichte und Jugendgerichtshilfen, Ham-
burg 13, Moorweiden Str. 18.

Kriminalbiologische Gesellschaft, c/o Professor Thomas Wiirtenberger,
University of Freiburg i. Br., Giinterstal Str. 70, West Germany.
Svenska Rriminalistforeningen, Riddarhuskaien 1, 1 Stockholm St.
Association of Scandinavian Criminologists: Dr. Carl Holmberg, Secre-
tary, The Northern Association of Criminalists, Justitie departementet,
Stockholm 2.

Schweizer Kriminologische Gesellschaft, c/o Professor Erwin Frey, Uni-
versity of Zurich, Faculty of Law, Zurich, Switzerland.

Canadian Corrections Association, 55 Parkdale Avenue, Ottawa 3,
Ontario.

National Council on Crime and Delinquency, 44 East 23 Street, New York,
10010 .

American Society of Criminology, 11 5-17 West 42nd Street, New York 36,

Japanese Association of Criminology, Tokyo Medical and Dental Uni-
versity, 3-Chome, Yushima, Bunkyo-Ku, Tokyo.

The International Penal and Penitentiary Commission (I.P.P.C.) was the
body which organized the International Penal and Penitentiary Con-
gresses held between 1872 and 1950 at intervals of five years (with the
exception of the years 1915 and 1920). Their Proceedings were published
in French as Actes des Congres Penitentiaires Internationaitx. Brief but
adequate English summaries of these Congresses, with the answers, are to

751

APPENDIX

be found in Negley K. Teeters, Deliberations of the International Penal and
Penitentiary Congresses 1877 to 1935 (Temple University Book Store
Philadelphia, Pa., 1949). The I.P.P.C. also published from time to time a
Recueil de Documents en matiere penale et penitentiare, a series not only of
penological, but also of criminological interest (see e.g. The Effect of the
War on Criminality referred to in Chapter 23 above). After the 1950
Congress the work of the I.P.P.C. was taken over by the United Nations
Department of Social Affairs which held the Congresses in 1955 (at the
Hague) and in 1960 (in London) and is organizing the Third Congress for
1965 (Stockholm).

Some of the activities of the I.P.P.C. are at present carried on by the
International Penal and Penitentiary Foundation.

The International Society of Criminology has so far held Congresses in
Rome (1938), Paris (1950), London (1955) and at The Hague (1960) and is
preparing its Fifth Congress for 1965 in Montreal. The Proceedings have
been published by the national Organizing Committees. In addition, the
Society has been responsible for annual international courses in criminology,
held in different countries, the proceedings of which have in some cases
also been published by the national Organizing Committees. The last three
of these courses were held in Jerusalem (1962), Cairo (1963) and Lyons
(1964). National and regional Congresses and courses in criminology have
been held in several countries since the Second World War.

II. INSTITUTES

Britain

Institute of Criminology, Cambridge University, 7 West Road, Cam-
bridge.

Institute for the Study and Treatment of Delinquency (I.S.T.D.),
8 Bourdon St., Davies St., London, W.l.

West Germany

Institut fur Rriminologie und Strafvollzugskunde, Universitat Freiburg
i. Br., Giinterstal Str. 70.

Institut fur auslandisches und intemationales Strafrecht, Universitat
Freiburg i. Br., Giinterstal Str.

Kriminalwissenschaftliches Institut, Universitat Koln, Koln.

Seminar fur Strafrecht und Kriminalpolitik, Universitat Hamburg,
2 Hamburg 13, Schliiter Str. 28.

Kriminalwissenschaftliches Institut, Freie Universitat, West Berlin.

Moreover, Institutes of Criminology have recently been established at
the Universities of Heidelberg, Munich and Tubingen.

Austria

Kriminologisches Institut, Universitat Wien, Liebiggasse 5, Vienna I.

Kriminalistisches Institut, Universitat Graz.

Switzerland

Kriminologisches Institut, Universitat Zurich.

752

APPBNDIX

Belgium

Centre d’Etude de la Delinquance juvenile, 49 rue du Cbatelain,
Brussels 5.

L’Ecole des Sciences criminologiques, Brussels, University.

L’Ecole de Criminologie, Louvain, University.

L’Ecole de Criminologie, Ghent, University.

L’Ecole de Criminologie, Liege, University.

France

Centre d’Etudes de Defense Sociale de L’Institut de Droit Compare de
l’Universite de Paris.

Institut de Criminologie, Faculte de Droit, Universite de Paris.

Institut Universitaire de Medicine Ldgale et de Criminologie Clinique
de Lyon, 12 avenue Rockefeller, Lyon.

Institut des Sciences Criminelles et Penitentiaires, Universite de Stras-
bourg, Strasbourg.

U.S.S.R.

Federal Institute for the Study of the Causes of Crime and of the Means
of Prevention, Moscow.

Italy

Centro Studi Penitenziari, Ministero di Grazia e Giustizia, Rome.
Scuola di diritto penale con Annesso, Istituto di Criminologia, Uni-
versity of Rome.

Instituto di osservazione, Roma-Rebibbia, via R. Majetti 162, Rome.
Instituto di Antropologia criminale, University of Rome.

Holland

Criminological Institute, University of Utrecht, Koningslaan 10,
Utrecht.

Institute of Criminal Law and Criminology, University of Leiden,
Rapenburg 38, Leiden.

Institute of Criminology, University of Groningen.

Poland

Institute of Criminology, University of Warsaw, Warsaw.

Canada

Institute of Criminology, University of Montreal, Montreal, P.O. 6128.
Centre of Criminology, University of Toronto, Toronto 5.

Israel

Institute of Criminology, Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

Institute of Criminology, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Tel-Aviv.

Norway

Institute of Criminology and Criminal Law, Oslo, Karl Johans Gt. 47.
ccn— z 753

APPENDIX

Sweden

Karolinska Institut of Forensic Psychiatry, Stockholm.

Kriminologiska Insitutet, Vastmannagatan 27, Stockholm.

Denmark

Institute of Criminology, University of Copenhagen, Studiestraede 10,
Copenhagen.

Finland

Institute of Criminology, University of Helsinki.

For all Scandinavian countries together there is the Scandinavian Re-
search Council of Criminology.

U.S.A.

School of Criminology, University of California at Berkeley.

Center of Criminological Research, University of Pennsylvania, Phila-
delphia 4, Pa.

A Centre for Studies in Criminal Justice is being established at the Uni-
versity of Chicago Law School.

American Society of Criminology, 115-7 West 42nd St., New York 36.

Centro de Investigaciones Sociales, Universidad de Puerto Rico, Rio
Piedras, P.R.

United Nations

United Nations Asia and Far East Institute for the Prevention of Crime
and Treatment of Offenders (UNAFEI), 26-1 Harumicho, Fuchu,
Tokyo, Japan.

Chile

Instituto de Ciencies Penales, Santiago, Chile.

Ecuador

Instituto de Criminologia, Quito.

(Other South American criminological Institutes are listed in Negley
K. Teeters, Penology from Panama to Cape Horn, Univ. of Pennsyl-
vania Press, Philadelphia, 1946.)

Information on Institutes of Criminology is also given in the UNESCO
‘Report on The University Teaching of Social Sciences’, Criminology, 1 957,
19 Avenue Kleber, Paris 16, especially in the General Survey, pp. 19-21,
and in the national reports. Some of this information is, however, already
out of date.

III. JOURNALS

Great Britain

(a) Criminological Journals

The British Journal of Criminology, published under the auspices of the
I.S.T.D., 8 Bourdon St., Davies St., London, W.l.

The Howard Journal, 6 Endsleigh St., London, W.C.l.

754

APPENDIX

Probation, c/o National Association of Probation Officers, 6 Endsleigh
St., London W.C.l.

Prison Service Journal, H.M. Prison Service Staff College, Love Lane,
Wakefield.

(b) Other Journals which publish material of criminological interest from

time to time.

The British Journal of Sociology, The London School of Economics,
Houghton St., London, W.C.2.

The British Journal of Psychiatry (formerly The Journal of Mental
Science), c/o R.M.P. A., 1 1 Chandos St., Cavendish Square, London,
W.l.

The Sociological Review, University of Keele, Keele, Staffordshire.

The Criminal Law Review, Stevens & Sons, 11 New Fetter Lane,
London, E.C.4.

The Modern Law Review, Stevens & Sons, 1 1 New Fetter Lane, London,
E.C.4.

The Law Quarterly Journal, Stevens & Sons, 11 New Fetter Lane,
London, E.C.4.

The Juridical Review, W. Green and Son, Ltd., St. Giles’ St., Edin-
burgh 1.

The Justice of the Peace and Local Government, Little London,
Chichester, Sussex.

The Magistrate, c/o The Magistrates’ Association, Tavistock House
South, Tavistock Square, London, W.C.l.

The Medico-legal Journal, published for the Medico-legal Society by
W. Heffer, Cambridge.

Medicine, Science and the Law, Official Journal of the British Academy
of Forensic Sciences, Sweet & Maxwell, 1 1 New Fetter Lane, London,
E.C.4.

Case Conference, published by the Association of Social Workers, etc.,
60 Denison House, 296 Vauxhall Bridge Rd., London, S.W.l.

Social Science Quarterly, published by the National Council of Social
Service, 26 Bedford Square, London, W.C.l.

The Lancet, 7 Adam St., London, W.C.2.

British Medical Journal, Official Organ of the British Medical Associa-
tion, B.M.A. House, Tavistock Square, London, W.C.l.

Human Relations, Tavistock Publications Ltd., 11 New Fetter Lane,
London, E.C.4.

British Journal of Medical Psychology, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cam-
bridge.

British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, published by the
British Psychological Society, Tavistock House South, Tavistock
Square, London, W.C.l.

Germany

(a) Monatsschrift fur Kriminologie und Strafrechtsreform, 2 Hamburg 13,
Schliiter Str. 28.

755

APPENDIX

Zeitschrift fir die gesamte Strafrechtswissenschaft, W. de Gruyter
1 Berlin 30, Genthiner Str. 13.

Bewahrungshilfe, 532 Bad Godesberg, Friedrich Ebert Str. 11.
Zeitschrift fur Strafvollzug , c/o Prof. Albert Krebs, Wilhelm Str. 24,
Wiesbaden.

(b) Recht der Jug end, 545 Neuwied, Heddersdorfer Str. 31.

Goltdammers Archiv fir Strafrecht, 2 Hamburg 13, Heimhuder Str. 53.
Kolner Zeitschrift fur Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, Westdeutscher
Verlag, Koln and Opladen, 567 Opladen, Ophovener Str. 1-3.
Jurist enzeitung, Verlag J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 74 Tubingen,
Wilhelm Str. 18.

France

(a) Revue de Science criminelle et de Droit penal compare, 31 Rue Saint-

Guillaume, Paris Vile.

( b ) Sauvegarde de VEnfance, U.N.A.R., 28 Place St. Georges, Paris, IXme.
Switzerland

(ci) Revue internationale de Criminologie et de Police technique, Case
Postalc 129, Geneva 4. Chief Ed. Prof. Jean Graven, Geneva.

(b) Schweizerische Zeitschrift fir Strafrecht (Revue Penale Suisse), c/o
Prof. H. Schultz, Thun, Pappelweg 11.

Belgium

(a) Revue de Droit pdnal et de Criminologie, Ministfere de la Justice, Palais

de Justice, Brussels.

( b ) Revue de Sociologie, Institut de Sociologie (Ernest Solvay), Universite

Libre de Bruxelles.

Holland

Tijdschrift voor Strafrecht, E. J. Brill, Leiden.

Scandinavian countries

Nordisk Tidskrif for Kriminalvidenskab, Dalsvinget 7, Hellerup,
Copenhagen.

Italy

(а) Quaderni di Criminologia clinica, Ministero di Grazia e Giustizia, Via

Arenula 71, Rome.

La Scuola Positiva, Dott. A. Giuffre Editore, Foro Buonaparte 24,
Milan. #

Rassegna di Studi Penitcnziari, Ministero di Grazia e Giustizia, Via
Arenula 71, Rome.

(б) Jm Giustizia Penale, Via Giovanni Nicotera 10, Rome.

Austria

Zeitschrift fir Rechtsvergleichung, Institut fur Rechtsvergleichung der
Universitat, Vienna.

756

APPENDIX

Several South American criminological journals are listed in Negley K.
Teeters (see above under Institutes).

U.S.A.

(a) The Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, andPolice Science, published

for Northwestern University School of Law, Chicago, by The
Williams & Wilkins Co., 428 East Preston St., Baltimore 2, U.S.A.
The Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, National Council on
Crime and Delinquency, 44 East 23 St., New York 10.

Crime and Delinquency , National Council on Crime and Delinquency,
44 East 23rd St., New York 10.

Federal Probation, Supreme Court Building, Washington, D.C.
20544.

American Journal of Correction, American Correctional Association.

2642 University Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota.

Corrective Psychiatry, Medical Correctional Association, 927 Fifth
Ave., New York 21.

The Prison Journal, published by the Pennsylvanian Prison Society,
311 South Juniper St., Philadelphia 7.

Archives of Criminal Psychodynamics, Station L, Washington 20, D.C.

( b ) Mental Hygiene, Official Organ of the National Association for Mental

Hygiene Inc., 10 Columbia Circle, New York 19.

American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 1790 Broadway, New York 19.
American Journal of Sociology, Univ. of Chicago Press, 5750 Ellis Ave.,
Chicago 37.

American Sociological Review, 49 Sheridan Ave., Albany, N.Y.

Social Problems, Northeastern University, Boston, Mass.

American Journal of Psychotherapy, 15 West 81st St., New York 24.
Social Forces, Univ. of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, N. Carolina,
American Journal of Psychiatry, published by The American Psychi-
atric Association, 1500 Greenmount Ave., Baltimore 2.

The Pacific Sociological Review, Department of Sociology, University
of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon.

The Social Service Review, Univ. of Chicago Press, 5750 Ellis Avenue,
Chicago 37.

The Annals of The American Academy of Political and Social Science,
3937 Chestnut St., Philadelphia 4, Pa.

Law and Contemporary Problems, School of Law, Duke University,
Durham, North Carolina.

Journal of Social Issues, published for the Society for the Psychological
Study of Social Issues, Univ. of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich.

Japan

{a) Acta Criminologiae et Medicinae Legalis Japonica, published by the
Japanese Association of Criminology, Department of Legal Medi-
cine, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, 3-Chome, Yushima,
Bunkyo-Ku, Tokyo.

757

APPENDIX

Journal of Correctional Medicine, Japanese Correctional Association,
Ministry of Justice, Tokyo. . ’

(b) Annals of the Hitotsubashi Academy, Hitotsubashi University, Kuni-
tachi, Tokyo.

Canada

The Canadian Journal of Corrections (La Revue Canadienne de Cri-
minologie), Canadian Corrections Association, 55 Parkdale Ave.,
Ottawa 3, Ontario.

India

Journal of Correctional Work, Government Jail Training School,
Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.

International

(a) International Review of Criminal Policy, United Nations Publication,

United Nations, Section Social Defence, New York.

Annates Internationales de Criminologie (International Annals of
Criminology), published by the International Society of Criminology,
28 Avenue de Friedland, Paris Vine.

Excerpta Criminologica, published by the Excerpta Criminologica
Foundation, 119-123 Herengracht, Amsterdam-C., Holland.

The International Criminal Police Review (Revue intemationale de
Police Criminelle), Interpol, 37 bis Rue Paul Valery, Paris XVIe.
Etudes Internationales de Psycho-Sociologie Criminelle, 56 Boulevard
Raspeil, Paris Vie.

( b ) The International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 7 Hollycroft Ave.,

London, N.W.3.

The International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, published for the Institute
of Psycho-Analysis, Bailliere, Tindall & Cox, 7-8 Henrietta St.,
London, W.C.2.

Revue intemationale de Droit Penal, Recueil Sirey, 22 rue Soufflot,
Paris Ve.

Government and University Departments and other official or private
bodies occasionally or regularly publishing the results of criminological
research (excluding regular annual publications of criminal statistics,
etc.)

Britain. Home Office Research Unit, Home Office, London, S.W.l:
Studies in the Causes of Delinquency and the Treatment of Offenders
(H.M.S.O.).

West Germany. Bundeskriminalamt Wiesbaden: Schriftenreihe des
Bundeskriminalamtes, Wiesbaden, Trankweg.

World Health Organization, Geneva: Public Health Papers (Cahicrs dc
Sante publique), Geneva.

758

APPENDIX

United Nations, Department of Social Affairs, New York.

Council of Europe, Department of Criminology, Strasbourg.

Ministry of Housing and Social Development, Northern Rhodesia,
Lusaka: Social Welfare Research Monographs, The Government
Printer, Lusaka.

University of Cambridge, Institute of Criminology: Cambridge Studies
in Criminology, Macmillan & Son Ltd., St. Martin’s St., London,
W.C.2.

Institute for the Study and Treatment of Delinquency ( I.S.T.D. ),
Bourdon St., London, Wl.: International Library of Criminology,
Tavistock Publications, 1 1 New Fetter Lane, E.C.4.

Research and Training Institute, Ministry of Justice, Tokyo.

NOTE: None of the above lists can claim to be exhaustive. Our object
was merely to include the most important and/or most widely known
bodies and periodicals in the fields of criminology and penology and
those other disciplines which contribute to the study of crime and its
treatment.

IV. BIBLIOGRAPHIES

1. Exclusively Criminological

D. C. Culver (later Tompkins), Bibliography of Crime and Criminal Justice,
Wilson, New York, 1927-31, 1932-37, 1934-39.

D. C. Culver, Administration of Criminal Justice 1949-56, California State
Board of Corrections, 1956.

Sir John Cumming, A Contribution towards a Bibliography dealing with
Crime and Cognate Subjects, 3rd ed., London, 1935.

P. S. de Q. Cabot, Juvenile Delinquency: A Critical Annotated Bibliography,
New York, 1946.

Thorsten Sellin and L. D. Savitz, ‘A Bibliographic Manual for the Student
of Criminology’. In: International Bibliography on Crime and Delinquency
(National Council on Crime and Delinquency, NCCD, New York,
10010, 44 East 23 Street, see also below under ‘Continuing Publications’),
1964, 1(3). Earlier ed. published separately by the University of Penn-
sylvania 1959.

D. C. Tompkins (formerly Culver), The Offender: A Bibliography, Institute
of Governmental Studies, Berkeley, Calif., 1963.

D. C. Tompkins, Probation since World War II: A Bibliography, Berkeley,

Continuing Publications

International Bibliography on Crime and Delinquency, NCCD (see above).
International Review of Criminal Policy, published by United Nations, New
York, in English, French, and Spanish: The bibliography, which had
previously appeared in every other issue of this periodical, has since 1963
been presented ‘separately from, and as a supplement to, the Review’.

759

APPENDIX

International Annals of Criminology, the Bulletin of the International
Society of Criminology, 28 Avenue de Friedland, Paris Vine, also pub-
lished in French, English, and Spanish. It now contains in every issue a
substantial bibliography on selected aspects of criminology.

Excerpta criminologica. An international abstracting service in the field of
causation, prevention, treatment and control of offenders, criminal pro-
cedure and the administration of justice. Excerpta Criminologica
Foundation, 119-123 Herengracht, Amsterdam-C., The Netherlands.

Bibliografia sui criminali anormali, published by Centro Nazionale di
Prevenzione e Difesa Sociale, Sezione Criminologica, prepared by F.
Ferracuti, M. Fontanesi, I. Melup, G. Minervini, Palazzo di Giustizia,
Rome, 1965.

U.S. Children's Bureau: Juvenile Delinquency references, Washington,
1961.

Correctional Research, published irregularly by the United Prison Associa-
tion of Massachusetts, 33 Mt. Vernon Street, Boston 8, Mass., contains
bibliographies on specific subjects.

2. Bibliographies dealing with Criminology and Other Disciplines
P. R. Lewis, The Literature of the Social Sciences, Library Association,
London, 1960.

Continuing Publications

Mental Health Book Review Index, sponsored by the World Federation for
Mental Health and other bodies, published annually, with references to
signed book reviews in the English language, located at the Research
Center for Mental Health, New York University, New York 10003.
Current Sociology (JLa Sociologie contemporaire). An International Biblio-
graphy of Sociology, published by UNESCO, 19 Avenue Kleber, Paris
XVIe, in English and French, prepared by the International Sociological
Association with the support of the International Committee for Social
Sciences Documentation.

Psychological Abstracts. Section ‘Crime and Delinquency’. Published bi-
monthly by the American Psychological Association, 1233 Sixteenth
Street, New York.

Sociological Abstracts. Section ‘Crime and Delinquency’. Published by the
International Sociological Association, Midwestern Sociological Society
and the Eastern Sociological Society, 2315 Broadway, New York 24.

A London Bibliography of the Social Sciences, The London School of
Economics and Political Science, ed. by the Director of the School,
11 vols., 1931-55.

(For assistance in the compilation of this list I am obliged to Professor
Franco Ferracuti, Rome and Puerto Rico, lately of United Nations; to
Mr. Hugh Klare of The Howard League for Penal Reform; and to the
Librarian of the Cambridge University Institute of Criminology.)

760

APPENDIX

V. TEXTBOOKS*

United States of America

(a) General

Edwin H. Sutherland and Donald R. Cressey, Principles of Criminology,
6th ed., Lippincott, Philadelphia, 1960.

Walter C. Reckless, The Crime Problem, 3rd ed., Appleton-Century-Crofts,
New York, 1961.

Donald R. Taft, Criminology, 4th ed., Macmillan, New York, 1961.

Harry Elmer Barnes and Negley K. Teeters, New Horizons in Criminology,
3rd ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1959.

Mabel A. Elliott, Crime in Modem Society, Harper, New York, 1952.

Robert G. Caldwell, Criminology, Ronald Press, New York, 1956.

Paul W. Tappan, Crime, Justice and Correction, McGraw-Hill, New York,
1960.

Herbert A. Bloch and Gilbert Geis, Man, Crime and Society, Random
House, New York, 1962.

Richard Korn and Lloyd W. McCorkle, Criminology and Penology, Holt,
Rinehart & Winston, New York, 1960.

George B. Void, Theoretical Criminology, Oxford University Press, New
York, 1958.

Hans von Hentig, Crime: Causes and Conditions, McGraw-Hill, New Y ork,
1947.

Ruth S. Cavan, Criminology, 2nd ed., Crowell, New York, 1955.

Marshall B. Clinard, Sociology of Deviant Behavior, 2nd ed.. Holt, Rine-
hart & Winston, New York, 1964 (dealing with crime only as one aspect
of ‘deviant’ behaviour).

( b ) Especially on Juvenile Delinquency

Negley K. Teeters and John Otto Reinemann, The Challenge of Delinquency,
Prentice-Hall, New York, 1950.

Paul W. Tappan, Juvenile Delinquency, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1949.

Sheldon Glueck (ed.), The Problem of Delinquency, Houghton Mifflin,
Boston, 1959.

Herbert A. Bloch and Frank T. Flynn, Delinquency. The Juvenile Offender
in America Today, Random House, New York, 1956.

Sophia M. Robison, Juvenile Delinquency. Its Nature and Control, Holt,
New York, 1960.

Martin H. Neumeyer, Juvenile Delinquency in Modem Society, 3rd ed.,
Van Nostrand, New York, 1961.

Harry M. Shulman, Juvenile Delinquency in American Society, Harper,
New York, 1961.

* Only the most important textbooks have here been included. For some further

data, especially on works written in Spanish, see Jean Pinatel, Criminologie,

pp. 16-29, Also Leon Radzinowicz, In Search of Criminology, Harvard Uni-
versity Press, Cambridge, 1962, pp. 223^46.

761

APPENDIX

Milton L. Barron, The Juvenile in Delinquent Society, Knopf, New York,

Clyde B. Vedder, The Juvenile Offender, Random House, New York, 1954,

W. C. Kvaraceus, et al., Delinquent Behavior, National Educational
Association, Washington, 1960.

Great Britain

Howard Jones, Crime and the Penal System, 1st. ed. 1956, 2nd ed. 1962,
University Tutorial Press, London.

Nigel Walker, Crime and Punishment in Britain, Edinburgh University
Press, 1965

Historical: Pioneers in Criminology, ed. by H. Mannheim, Stevens, London,
1960.

Austria

Ernst Seelig, Lehrbuch der Kriminologie, 1st ed., Jos. A. Kienreich, Graz,
1951. French trans.. Presses Universitaires de France, Paris, 1956. ,

Belgium '

Etienne de GreefF, Introduction a la Criminologie, Vanden Plas, Brussels,
1946.

Brazil

Leonidio Ribeiro, Criminologia, Sudamericana, Rio de Janeiro, 1957.

Denmark

Stephan Hurwitz, Criminology, Allen & Unwin, and G. E. C. Gad,
Publishers, London and Copenhagen, 1952.

France

Robert Vouin et Jacques Leaute, Droit Penal et Criminologie, Presses
Universitaires de France, Paris, 1956.

Jean Pinatel, Criminologie, Librairie Dalloz, Paris, 1963.

German Federal Republic

Franz Exner, Kriminalbiologie, 1st ed., 1939, Hanseatische Verlagsanstalt,
Hamburg. 3rd revised ed. Kriminologie, Springer, Berlin-Gottingen-
Heidelberg, 1949. “ “

Hans von Hentig, Das Verbrechen. Vol. I: Der kriminelle Menscli im
Kraftespiel von Zeit und Raum, 1 961 . Vol. II : Der Delinquent im Griff der
Umweltkrdfte, 1962. Vol. Ill: Anlage-Komponents im Getriebe des
Delikts, 1963. All 3 vols. Springer, Berlin.

Eduard Mezger, Kriminologie, Beck, Munich, 1951.

Armand Mergen, Die Wissenschaft vom Verbrechen . Kriminalistik, Ham-
burg, 1961. This book is not intended to be a ‘textbook’ in the technical
sense.

Wilhelm Sauer, Kriminologie als Reine und Angewandte Wissenschaft, De
Gruyter, Berlin, 1950.

Wolf Middendorff, Soziologie des Verbrechens, Eugen Diederichs,Diissel-
dorf-Koln, 1959. This is, as the title implies, limited to the Sociology of
Crime.

762

APPENDIX

Fritz Bauer, Das Verbrechen und die Gesellschaft, Reinhardt, Munich and
Basel, 1957.

(On Juvenile Delinquency) Wolf Middendorff, Jugendkriminalogie, Aloys
Henn, Ratingen, 1956.

Holland

J. M. van Bemmelen, Criminologie. 4th ed., W. E. J. Tjeenk Willink,
Zwolle, 1958.

W. A. Bonger, An Introduction to Criminology, transl. by Emil van Loo,
Methuen, London, 1936. The same in Dutch : Inleiding tot de Criminologie,
3rd ed. by G. Th. Kempe, De Erven F. Boon, Haarlem, 1954.

India

S. Vcnugopala Rao, Facets of Crime in India, Allied Publishers, New Delhi
and London, 1963.

Italy

Benigno di Tullio, Principi di criminologia clinica e psichiatria forense, 2nd
ed., Istituto di Medicine Sociale, Rome, 1960.

Alfredo Niceforo, Criminologia, 6 vols., 1941-52.

Sweden

OlofKinberg, Basic Principles of Criminology, Munksgaard, Copenhagen,
and Heinemann, London, 1935.

Ivar Agge et al, Kriminologi, Wahlstrom och Widstrand, Stockholm, 1955.

Soviet Russia

A. B. Sacharow, Die Personlichkeit des Taters und die Ursachen der Kri-
minalitat in der UdSSR, Staatsverlag der Deutschen Demokratischen
Republik, 1962.

International Surveys of specific aspects of Criminology, in particular

teaching and research

UNESCO, The University Teaching of Social Sciences: Criminology, Paris,

Leon Radzinowicz, In Search of Criminology, Harvard University Press,
Cambridge, 1962.

VI. ENCYCLOPAEDIAS

Handworterbuch der Kriminologie, 2 vols., Berlin und Leipzig, Walter de
Gruyter, 1932-36. (2nd ed. in preparation.)

Encyclopedia of Criminology, ed. by Vernon C. Branham and Samuel B.

Kutash, Philosophical Library, New York, 1949.

Elsevier's Dictionary of Criminal Science, ed. by J. A. Adler, 1960. In eight
languages. Distributed by D. van Nostrand Company Ltd., London, for
Elsevier Publishing Company, Amsterdam.

763

APPENDIX

VII. READINGS

Marvin E. Wolfgang, Leonard Savitz, and Norman Johnston, The Socio-
logy of Crime and Delinquency , John Wiley, London and New York,
1962.

Clyde B. Vedder, Samuel Koenig, and Robert E. Clark, Criminology. A
Book of Readings, The Dryden Press, New York, 1953.

Index of Subjects

Abnormality; see Normality
Abortion, 112—13

Accidental offenders in psycho-
analytical theory, 324
Actio libera in causa, 349
Action (or operational) research
in criminology. Chapter 10, i,
386

Adaptability, its relation to nor-
mality, 285

Adaptation, Merton’s types of
social, 503-5

Administrative offences, 23-4
Adolescents, their delinquent sub-
culture, Chapter 22; see also
Age factor

Adolescents in riots, 650-1
Affluent society, 427, 432-3
Africa, crime in, 160
Age distribution of offenders, 103,
107-8, Chapter 26, i
Age factor in crime. Chapter 26, i;
see also Juvenile delinquency,
Adolescents, Age distribution
of offenders

Aggression, 289 ff., 292, 305; see
also Frustration

Alcoholic disorders, 246-50; see
also Alcoholism, Drunkenness
Alcoholism

of parents of offenders, 249
national differences, 249
types of alcoholics, 162
see also Alcoholic disorders
Ambivalence, 316
feelings of, among working-class
youths, 509-10, 516
Amentia, 270

American culture
its critics, 437, 503-6
its influence on British culture,
457-8

American Law Institute, its Model
Penal Code, 342

American sex offenders laws; see
Psychopaths, Maryland Defec-
tive Delinquency Law
Amnesia, 253

Analytical psychology of Jung, 331
Anatomical abnormalities of crim-
inals, 213

Anomie, 72, 501-3, 507
Anthropological-biological aspects
of criminology. Chapters 11,
12, 13

Anthropological factors in crime;
see Physical factors. Anthro-
pological-biological aspects
Anxiety neurosis, 259
Area (or ecological) studies in
criminology; see Ecological
theory of crime
Argot, criminal, 215
Arson; see Pyromania
Art forgeries, their cultural and
social background, 463-4
Associations in crime, Chapters 24
and 25 ; see also Gangs, Groups,
Crowds, Female criminality
Asthenic or leptosome types, 236 ff.
Atavism, Lombroso’s theory of,
216-17

Athletic type, 237 ff., 252; see also
Kretschmer’s types
Attitudes, their relationship to
norms and values, 425-6

765

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

Attitudes — contd.
in offences against property,
583-5

see also Parental attitudes, Extra-
punitive attitude

Australian law of insanity, 340,
342

Austrian (or Vienna) School of
Criminology, 16, 21
Auto thieves, 465-6; see also
Motoring offences

Barge Boys’ Club, 188-9
Betting, increase in, 506
Bias in research, 74-6, 129, 133
Biological aspects of criminology;
see Anthropological-biological
aspects

Blackmail, 643, 693
Blasphemy, 36, 366
Born criminal type of Lombroso,
165, 215

Bourgeois age, its passing, 531
Bribery, 495-6

Bristol social project, 189-90, 556,
559-60

British Broadcasting Corporation
(B.B.C.), critics of, 434; see
also Mass communication
British Journal of Criminology (pre-
viously British Journal of Delin-
quency), 80; see also references
to it in the Notes and the
Appendix

British culture, its critics, 427-43;

see also American culture
Broadmoor institution, 343-5
Buckinghamshire train robbery,
548, 657-9

Cambridge-Somerville (Massachu-
setts) youth study, 128, 130,
178-9, 275
Canadian research
on problem families, 625
on latecomers to crime, 689
Capitalist society, 445
Car thieves; see Auto thieves

Case histories; see Individual case
histories, Case records
Case records, their use in crimino-
logical research, 127-9
Casual dock labour, 439
Catholics, their crime rate, 571-2;

see also Religion
Causation

its different meaning in crimin-
ology and criminal law, 5, 360
causal approach in criminology,

5-12

in natural and social sciences, 6 ff.
one-factor and multiple-factor
theories of, 8-11, 219, 534, 579
causal laws in criminology, 10
see also Criminological laws,
Statistical correlations, Pre-
disposing and precipitating
factors

Chicago area project, 187-8, 553-4,

558-60

Chinese society, compared with
British, 527-8

compared with American, 616-17

Cinema, see Films

Class, social, of offenders, 1 14, 459-
468

research on class bias in educa-
tion, 192, 293, 450-3
class differences in society, 436-
437

class conflict, Chapter 20 , 1
in legislation, 459
see also White collar offences,
Middle classes, Upper classes,
Working classes

Class-oriented theories of crime,
Chapter 22

Classical school of criminology,
221

Collective behaviour, 637 ; see also
Associations in crime

‘College boys’ and ‘corner boys’,
509-10

Community studies in criminology,
187-90, 195; see also Eco-
logical theory of crime

766

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

Compensation and over-compen-
sation in Adler’s psychology,
329-30

Compensation for victims of crime ;
' see Victims

Compulsive stealing; see Klepto-
mania
Confession

the urge to make a, 322
in religion and penal philosophy,
37

Containment theory, 734
Control group studies, their use in
criminological research, 130-5,
227, 249, 370

Corporations, their role in white
collar crimes, 473-5, 478, 482-
484

Correlations; sec Statistical corre-
lations

Court statistics of crime v. Police
statistics, 113-15
Crime

three approaches to its study,
3-14

its legal definition, 22
its relation to the criminal law,
22-34

history of the term, 31
see also Motives of crime,
Criminal law
Crime passionnel, 302
‘Criminal families’, research on,
229-30

Criminalistics, 16, 20
Criminality index, 118, 374, 577-9;

see also Economic factors
Criminal justice, its objects, 141
Criminal law

its relation to religion, 35-7
its relation to custom, 37-9
its relation to morality, 39-66
its effect on criminological re-
search, 74

relating to mentally abnormal
offenders, Chapter 18
its relation to psychiatry, 334-6
see also Causation, Criminal re-

sponsibility, Moral responsi-
bility, M'Naghten Rules
Criminaloids, 216
Criminal procedure, 336, 346, 348
Criminal responsibility, 337; see
also Diminished responsibility
Criminals from a sense of guilt; see
Guilt, Injustice

Criminal statistics, Chapters 5 and 6
interpretation, 109-18
international and foreign, 118-22,
376-7

see also Dark figure. Statistical
research in criminology
Criminal statutes, British and
foreign; see at the end of the
Index

Crimino-biological Society, 239
Criminological research; see Re-
search in criminology
Criminology

its definition and objects, 3 ff.
its scope, 14 ff.

its factual, non-normative char-
acter, 13

its laws; see Laws, criminological
criminological classifications dif-
ferent from legal ones, 15
its dependence on other disci-
plines, 17

its relations to criminalistics, 16
its relations to the sociology of
criminal law and sociological
jurisprudence, 18
Crowds, 643-55

Culture, its different meanings,
420-2

working class culture, 523
see also Subculture, Culture con-
flict

Culture conflict, theory of, 539,
562-4; see also Culture and
Subculture

Custom, its relation to criminal
law, 37-9

Cycloid type, 238; see also Kret-
schmer’s typology

767

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

Cyclothyme type, 238

Dangerousness {Etat dangereux),
222-3, 298

Dark figure of criminal statistics,
109-1 3, 375-6
‘Dark legend’, 601-2
Decision theory, 11, 362
Deferred gratification as a criterion
of the middle classes, 447, 521,
525

Degeneracy, Lombroso’s theory of,
216-17

Delinquency area studies, 552-60
Delinquency index; see Criminality
index

Delinquent generations, 598, 686
Dementia, 270

Dementia praecox; see Schizo-
phrenia

Density of population; see Popu-
lation

Departmental and inter-depart-
mental committees as poten-
tial research agencies, 80
Descriptive studies in crimino-
logical research, 139-40
Determinism; see Free will
Deviance, social, 370
Differential association, theory of,
8-9, 477, 599

Diminished responsibility, 344-5
Discipline, parental; see Family
Dolphin Club, 189
Doping of racehorses, 659
Drug addiction, 253-6, 398-9
Drug trafficking, 254-6, 544
Drunkenness offences, 106, 247-50
pathological drunkenness, 251
legal position of, 348-50
and motorists, 467
Durham rule, 342

Ecological theory of crime, 195,
Chapter 23, A; see also Popu-
lation

Economic factors in crime, Chapter
23, C

mistakes made in studying them,
573-9

economic index for measuring
their importance, 577-9
effect of depression and inflation,
586-7

unemployment, 587-8
see also Criminality index.
Poverty, Prosperity
Ectomorph type, 240-1
Education

its short-term aspects, 628-33,
719

its long-term aspects, 633-5
Lombroso’s views on, 224
see also School, Class, social, bias
in education
Ego, the, 313

Ego-involvement in crime, 299-300
Electro-encephalogram (E.E.G.),
245, 253 ; see also Epilepsy
Embezzlement, 33, 464-5
Encephalitis lethargica, 244
Endocrinology, 235-6
Endomorph type, 240-1
Epilepsy, 216, 245-6, 396
legal problems of, 341
Etat dangereux ; see Dangerousness
Euthanasia; see Liege thalidomide
trial

Exhibitionism, 260
Existentialism, 323
Experimental methods in crimino-
logical research, Chapter 9,
185-6

quasi-experiments ( ex-post-facto
experiments), IS 1-3
experiments in jurisprudence, 183
Expert witness, his position in Eng-
lish criminal procedure, 336
Extrapunitive attitude, 289 ff, 517-
518

Extr avert and introvert types, 164,
166, 331-3, 412
Eysenck’s theory, 265

Factorial analysis in criminological
research, 82, 293

768

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

Factors in crime
selection for research, 7-11, 201
predisposing and precipitating, 10
see also Physical factors
Facts as objects of criminological
study, 3-4, 360
Family

its sociological role, 508
its criminological significance,
Chapter 24, 1
especially its size, 610-11
sibling position in it, 611-13
parental attitudes and disci-
pline, 613-18
unwanted children, 617
step-parents, 620
maternal deprivation, 620-2
mothers working outside
622-3

illegitimacy, 623
social problem families, 624-5
marriage, 625-7
family groups in crime, 642
Father-state analogy, 328
Feeble-mindedness; see Mental de-
ficiency

Female criminality, 596-7, Chap-
ter 26, ii

Female labour, 705
Fetishism, 261

Films, their influence on crime,
600-3

Firesetting; see Pyromania
Fixation, 315

Follow-up studies, their use in
criminological research, 135-9
Free will, 219, 249, 335-6
French criminal statistics
Ferri’s study of, 219
age distribution of crime in, 680
French environmental school of
criminology, 218

Frustration, 290-1, 305-6, 330; see
also Aggression

Gangs

adolescent, 511-12, 518, 665-70
adult, 655-65 .

see also Buckinghamshire train
robbery

Gasoline smelling, 255
Gaussian law, 97, 374
Geldbussen in German law, 24
General paralysis of the insane,
243

its legal position, 340
Generality v. specificity of character
and conduct, 163
Genius and crime, 214, 279-81
Geographical factors in crime; see
Physical factors
Germany, West
age distribution of crime, 680
Halbstarkenkrawalle in, 650-1
see also Criminal statutes, Ger-
many

Glands; see Endocrinology
Gordon Riots, 650, 654
Government departments, their role
in criminological research, 74,
77, 80; see also Home Office
Research Unit and Home
Office Advisory Council
Greek law and philosophy, and the
law of nature, 42-3
Grendon prison, 345, 414
Groups as factors in crime, Chapters
24 and 25

distinguished from classes, 500
primary and secondary, 606
small group research, 606
reference groups, 607
Guilt, 24, 290

criminals from a sense of, 60, 64,
320-4

see also Mens rea. Injustice,
criminals from a sense of

Heath, Neville, case, 333
Heredity, its effect on crime, 217,
229-36

Hidden criminality; see Dark
figure

Highfields project, 179-80
Hire-purchase transactions, 494-5
History of crime, 374, 422-4
769

c c n — AA

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

Home Office Advisory Council on
the Treatment of Offenders
(ACTO)

its various reports, 81, 592
especially its report on alterna-
tives to short terms of im-
prisonment, 82-3

Home Office Research Unit, 79-80,
98, 123; see also Government
departments

Home Office White Papers of 1959
and 1964, 79-80, 372, 427-8,
573

Homme moyen, Quetelet’s concept
of, 97

Homicide, see Murder and Man-
slaughter

Homosexuality, 36, 40, 53, 112, 309
female, 672

books written by homosexuals,
160

Housing and crime, 556, 560-2
new housing estates, 556-60
house ownership, 561
see also ‘Rachmanism’

Hubris, the Greek idea of, 321
Hypoglycaemia, 253
Hypothesis, its place in crimino-
logical research, 72-3, 84-5,
129, 370-1
Hysteria, 259

Ibsen’s Nora, 702
Hedda Gabler, 707
Id, the, 313
Identification, 315
Illegitimacy; see Family
Imitation, 311

between social classes, 453-5
and crime, 453, 599-600
Immaturity of criminals, 304, 309;

' see also Inadequate person-
ality types, Maturation
Immigration; see Population
Impunitive attitude; see Extra-
punitive attitude

Inadequate Personality Types of
Criminals, 166, 270, 304, 309

Incest taboo, origin of, 319
Incorrigibility, alleged, of certain
types of criminals, 239, 269
Indeterminate sentences, 224-5
Indeterminism; see Free will
Index; see Criminality index
Indictable and non-indictable of-
fences, 102-4
statistics of, 106-8
Individual case histories, research
on, Chapter 8, n

Individual psychology, Adler’s
school of, 329
Individual v. society
contrast between them leading to
clashes between law and
psychiatry, 334-6
Infancy period, 318
Inferiority complex, 315, 329-30,
612, 624

Inflation, its effect on crime; see
Economic factors in crime
Injustice, criminals from a sense of,
60-6, 307; see also Guilt,
criminals from a sense of
Insecurity feeling
of criminals, 305
among workers, 438-9
Institute for the Study and Treat-
ment of Delinquency
(I.S.T.D.), London, 258
Intelligence of criminals, 273-
279

Intelligence quotient (I.Q.), 273
International criminal statistics;

see Criminal statistics
International Association of Penal
Law, 21

International Penal and Peniten-
tiary Congresses, 119
International Society of Crimino-
logy, 18

International Society of Social
Defence, 21

Intoxication Psychosis; see Alco-
holic disorders

Intrapunitive attitude; see Extra-
punitive attitude

770

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

Intuitive methods in criminological
research, 85, 162, 215
Involutional melancholia, 251
Irish immigrants, their crime rate,
541-2

Irresistible impulse, 341-2, 414
Italy, age distribution of crime in,
680; see also Mafia and Sicily

Japan

age distribution of crime in,
679

twin research in, 233-4
Jealousy, morbid, of the paranoiac,
251

Jews, their criminality, 538-9, 567-
570; see also Minorities
Justice, its relation to the positive
law, 42 tf.; see also Guilt,
Injustice

Juvenile delinquency, 306
statistics of, 113, 682
in time of war, 597-9

Kleptomania, 260-1
Kohlhaas, Michael, his story, 60,
63-4, 307, 583

Kretschmer’s typology, 236-40; see
also Asthenic or leptosome.
Athletic, Pyknic types
'Kriminalpolitik' , is it part of
criminology?, 13, 18

Latecomers to crime, 687-9
Latency period, 315
Law, definition of, 22
Laws, criminological, 12-14, 292
Laws, legal or juridical, 12-13; see
also Criminal law
Laws, scientific, different from
mere trends, 12, 14
Leptosome type; see Asthenic type
Lesbianism; see Homosexuality
Libido, 315

Licensing Act, 1872, 246-7
Liege thalidomide trial, 60, 369
Liverpool criminological studies,
528-30

Looting, attitudes towards, 585
Loyalty between criminals, 308-9

MacMahon’s attempt on King
Edward VIII, 328
M c Naghten Rules, 339-40
historical developments leading
to, 338-9

the present law, 339-44
the post-M c Naghten law, 344-8
criticisms of, 340-1
onus of proof according to, 341,
343

proposals for reform and foreign
law, 341-4

see also Irresistible impulse
Mafia, 218, 520, 660-3, 665
Mala perse and malaprohibita, 26, 30
Manic-depressive psychosis, 251-2
its relation to physical types, 237
Manslaughter, 33

Marriage, its criminological signi-
ficance; see Family
Maryland Defective Delinquency
Law, 267
Marxism

its view of the law, 35
its interpretation of political
crimes, 327
its critics, 445
Masculine protest, 521
Mass character of offences, 23-5
Mass communication, techniques
of, their influence on crime,
600-5; see also British Broad-
casting Corporation
Matching in criminological re-
search; see Control group
studies

Maternal deprivation; see Family
Matricide and patricide, 155, 382
Maturation theory, 304, 627, 684; see
also Immaturity of criminals
Mens rea, 32-3; see also Guilt
Mental deficiency (subnormality),
Chapter 15, n

classifications and definitions,
270-3

771

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

Mental deficiency — contd.
relation to psychosis, 273
legal position, 341, 343
see also Mental Deficiency Acts
Mental Deficiency Acts of 1913 and
1927, 270-2

Mental Health Act, 1959, 242-
243, 267-8, 271-2, 343, 346-8,
350

Mentally abnormal offenders,
Chapters 14 and 15
the criminal law relating to them;
see Criminal law
Mesomorph type, 240-1
Methodology of criminological re-
search, Chapters 4-10; see also
Research in criminology in
general, Statistical research,
Prediction research, Indivi-
dual case histories, Typo-
logical methods, Experimental
methods, Action (or oper-
ational) research. Sociological
methods. Problem v. method
Middle classes

crime among members of, 459-
468, 513-15, 520-3
their standards as compared with
working-class standards, 447,
508-9, 525-6

Migration; see Population
Minnesota Multiphasic Personality
Inventory (M.M.P.I.), 287-9
Minorities and crime, 563-72; see
also Jews, Negroes
Mobility; see Population
Molony Report, 494
Monopolies, 440-1, 489-92
Monotony of factory work, 590-1 ;

see also Occupation
‘Moral defectives’, 271-2
Morality, positive and critical,
57; see also Criminal law
Moral responsibility, 219, 224; see
also Criminal law
Moral sense, lack of, 215
Motives of crime, 294-303
‘motiveless crime’, 245, 296-7

real as distinguished from the
conscious motives, 326
Motoring offences, 106-7, 248, 325,
364, 466-7; see also Auto
thieves. Drunkenness offences
Movies; see Films
Multiple-factor theory of crime
causation; see Causation
Murder

definition of, 15, 34
statistics of, 112, 117
types of, 171

by manic-depressives, 251
psychology of, 294-303
motives of, 295-303
association in, 642-3
see also M c Naghten Rules

‘Natural crime’, 31, 220-1
Natural law, 41-8, 58-60, 220,
367-70; see also Positive law
Natural v. social science methods in
criminology, 89-90; see also
Causation

Negroes and crime, 461, 565-7
Neuroses and psycho-neuroses,
Chapter 15, i

their incidence in the prison
population, 258
Freudian theory of, 258-9
distinction between them and the
psychoses, 257, 399
see also the various specific types
of neuroses

Neutralization; see Rationalization
New Hampshire Rule, 342
‘Non-sane non-insane’ offenders,
legal position, 340-1
Normality, its definition, 270,
284-5, 324

Normal offenders, their psycho-
logy, Chapter 16

Norms, 13, 419, 424-5; see also
Values

Obsessional and compulsive neuro-
sis, 260; see also Kleptomania,
Pyromania

772

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

Occasional criminal co-operation
of small numbers of persons,
637-42; see also Associations
Occupations, their influence on
crime, 588-91, 633-4; see also
Monotony

Oedipus complex, 315-16
Only children; see Family
Operational research; see Action
research

Oppression, its effect on crime, 289
Organized crime; see Gangs
Othello, 309

‘Other-directed’ types, 546

Paranoia, 250-1
and paraphrenia, 215
its legal position, 340-1
Participant observation, technique
of, 186, 192-4

Parental attitudes; see Family
Pentonville prison, research in, 74,
255

‘ Personlichkeits-eigen ’ and ‘persdn-
lichkeits-fremd', types of mur-
der, 297-300, 406
Personality
definitions of, 294-9
and motives, 297
see also Motives
Perversions, sexual, 260
Phobia; see Anxiety neurosis
Phrenologists, their place in crimin-
ology, 212-13, 216
Physical factors in crime, Chapters
11 and 12; see, in particular,
Physical geography, 203-5,
Physical health, 206-11,
Female criminality, in, 699-701
Physiognomy, its place in crimin-
ology, 212-13

Picture-Frustration Study (P.F.S.),
289-91

Pilkington Committee Report on
Broadcasting; see B.B.C.

Pilot studies, 93-4, 127
Pleasure principle, 313
Police statistics, 110, 113-15

of cautions, 110
Political crimes
their symbolic meaning, 327-8
and social class, 469
legal concept, 721
Polycrates complex, 321
Population, effect on crime of,
Chapter 23
density of, 533-5
mobility of, migration and immi-
gration, 536-44
especially immigration of
foreigners, 538-44
immigration of Irish, 541-2
immigration of Jews, 538-9
immigration of Negroes, 537-8,
727

selective migration, 539
Positivist school of criminology,
Chapter 12

Post-factum interpretation in re-
search, 129-30

Post-Lombrosian developments.
Chapter 13

Poverty and crime, 477, 580-2; see
also Economic factors
Power, lust for, among criminals,
310

Prediction research, 125, 128, Chap-
ter 7, 153, 182
misunderstandings of, 143-6
construction of prediction tables,
149

individual prediction, 149-52
typological prediction, 152
Predisposing and precipitating fac-
tors in crime causation, 10,
327, 648

Press, its glamorization of crime,
604-5

Prevention, research into preventive
techniques, 186-7

Preventive detention, its failure, 656
Prisoners, statistics of, 105, 108-9
research in prisons, 193—4
research by prisoners, 194
Problem v. method in crimino-
logical research, 88-9, 94

773

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

Projection, 317

Property offences, research on, 192;

see also Attitudes
Prosperity and crime, 438, 580-1
Prostitution as the female sub-
stitute for crime, 218, 701
murder of prostitutes, 300
living on their earnings, 538, 544
Psycho-analysis, Chapter 17
its principal concepts, 312-17
its bearing on criminology, 317—
329

its classification of offenders,
320-5

Psychology of crime, Chapter 16
its relation to criminology, 17
its relation to sociology, 286
see also Murder, Female crimin-
ality

Psychopaths and psychopathy,
Chapter 15, i, 2

types and characteristics of, 264
relation to criminality, 265-6
attitudes to punishment, 266-7
American sex offenders laws on,
267

their alleged incorrigibility, 269
legal position, 341, 345
women psychopaths, 707
see also Inadequate personality
types

Psychoses, Chapter 14
organic, 243-50
functional, 250-3
see also under the various specific
types of psychosis
Public opinion on crime
its influence on criminal statis-
tics, 117

shaped by punishment, 221
and morality, 54, 224
see also Criminal law, Morality,
Moral responsibility
Public and private sectors of the
community, 433-4
Public welfare offences, 22-6, 481-2
Puerperal insanity, 244-5
Punishment in psycho-analytical

774

theory, 321-2, 329; sec also
Psychopaths, their attitudes to
punishment

Pyknic type, 237 ff.; see also Kret-
schmer’s types
Pyromania, 261-3

Race; see Jews, Negroes
Race riots; see Riots
‘Rachmanism’, 562, 665; see also
Housing

‘Radby’ research of Nottingham
University, 379, 524-8
Raskolnikow, Dostoevsky’s, 310,
322, 408

Rationalization of motives, 307,
310, 325, 516
Reaction-formation, 314
Reality principle, 313
Rebels, their place in society, 455-7,
583

Receiving, 643

Recidivism, 31, 101-2, 115, 136,
224, 308, 322, 596, 683-6
Redundancy, legislation on, 439
Regulatory offences, see Public
welfare offences
Religion and crime, 570-2
its relation to the criminal law,
35-7

inpsycho-analytical theory, 320-1
see also Catholics
Replication studies, 92, 551
Repression, 314

Research in criminology, Chapters
3-10

in general, Chapter 1

its three historical stages, 84-6

its value, 86-7

distinction between ends and
means, 78

see also Methodology of crimino-
logical research. Research
workers, Intuitive methods
Research workers
their bias, 75-6

restricted to the presentation of
their findings, 77-8

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

their role in crimino-sociological
studies, 196-8

Resistance movements in war,
593

Responsibility; see Criminal res-
ponsibility

Retreatist type, 504, 518-20
Right and wrong test; see
M c Naghten Rules
Riots, special types of, 651-4'
Roman law

and the law of nature, 43
and the law of insanity, 338
Rorschach test, 289, 292
Royal Commissions as potential
agencies of criminological re-
search, 80-4; see also Royal
Commissions on specific sub-
jects

Royal Commission on the Care and
Control of the Feeble-minded,
1908,270-1

Royal Commission on Capital
Punishment, 1949-1953, 81,
340-2, 344

Royal Commission on the Law
relating to Mental Illness and
Mental Deficiency, 1954-7,
242-3, 269, 271, 274

Samples, their use in criminological
research, 124-7, 377
Schizoid type, 238
Schizophrenia, 252-3
its relation to physical types,
237

legal position, 340
Schizothyme type, .238
School, Chapter 24, u; see also
Education
Senile dementia, 244
Sentencing policy of magistrates’
courts, 461

Sex factor in crime, Chapter 26, n;
see also Female criminality.
Sex offenders
Sex offenders
books witten by, 160

hormone treatment of, 236
their feelings of guilt, 323
Sex ratio of crime, 596-7, 697-8 ; see
also Female criminality
Shoplifting, 465, 700, 702
by foreigners, 543
Short-circuit crimes, 300-2
Short-term imprisonment, research
on alternatives to, 82-3
Siblings; see Family
Sicily, poverty and crime in, 585-6;

see also Mafia
Sin; see Religion
Social class; see Class
Social mobility, 449-53
and education, 450-2
Social problem families; see Family
Social Sciences, Committee of In-
quiry into Research in the, 83
Society, our criminogenic. Chapters
19-21

Sociology, research in, 75, 77, 80
sociological methods in crimin-
ology, Chapter 10, n
sociology of crime, Part IV
Sociometric techniques in crimino-
logical research, 195
Soho, crime in, 555, 728
Somatotypes of Sheldon, 240-1
Soviet Russia

its anti-parasite laws, 497-8
age distribution of crime, 681
female criminality, 703
Specificity of character and con-
duct; see Generality
Spivs, 617

Statistical research in criminology,
Chapters 5 and 6; see also
Criminal statistics
Statistical correlations do not prove
causal nexus, 10 ff., 124, 361
‘Statistician-sociologists’, 222
Statistics; see Criminal statistics,
Statistical research in crimin-
ology, Statistical correlations
Statutes; see Criminal statutes,
British and foreign. Foreign
penal codes

775

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

Stealing as symbolic act, 316-17;
see also Kleptomania, Sym-
bolism

Step-parents; see Family
Stigmata, physical, of criminals, 21 5
Strict (or absolute) liability offences,
5, 24

Subculture, theories of the delin-
quent, Chapter 22 (2)
non-working-class variety of,
514-15

of women, 706
see also Culture
Sublimation, 314

Subnormality; see Mental defi-
ciency
Suicide

attempted, 171
relation to murder, 303
Super-ego, the, 313
Symbolism, 316-17, 326-8

Take-over bids, 440-1, 485-9
Tattooing among criminals, 216-17
Tax frauds, 492-4
Teamwork, the need for it, 18, 90-2
Television

its effect on children, 603-4
quiz frauds, 495

Thematic Apperception Test
(T.A.T.), 289-91

Theory, its place in criminological
research, 71-2; see also
Hypothesis

Torts (or civil wrongs), the dis-
tinction between them and
crime, 26-9

Town and country, differences in
crime rates, 544-51; see also
Ecological theory, Urbaniza-
tion and urbanism
Traffic offences; see Motoring of-
fences

Traits, different from types, 164—
165

and factors in Glueck research,
165

Transformator, psychological, need
for it, 201-2

Transit, statistics of thefts of goods
in, 116

Traumatic psychoses, 243-4
Trends, different from laws, 12, 14
Truancy, 632-3

Twin researches in criminology,
231-5, 393

Typological methods in crimino-
logical research, 159, Chapter
8,n

typologies of associations, 637
of female criminals, 701
see also Extravert and introvert
types, Extrapunitive attitude,
Kretschmer’s types

Unconscious, the, 312-13
Under-developed countries, crim-
inological studies in, 585
Unemployment; see Economic fac-
tors

Upper classes, their criteria, 446
their difficulties, 522
see also Class, social, of of-
fenders, White collar offences
Urbanization and urbanism, 544-5;
see also Town and country

Vagrants or tramps, 457
Validation studies in prediction
research, 93

Values and value judgments, 59,
429

their role in criminological re-
search, 7, 75, 443
their relation to norms, 424-5
lowering of, 429, 604-5
see also Norms

* Verst ehende' psychology and socio-
logy, 4, 360

Vicarious punishment, 317
Victim of an offence, 27, 171, 309
compensation of the, 676, 746
drunkenness of the, 248
Victimology, 670-6; see also Victim

776

INDEX OF SUBJECTS

Wages and salaries of different
categories of workers com-
pared, 431-2

War, its effect on crime, 591—
599

Welfare state, 435-6, 505, 717
‘Weltanschauung’, 11, 75, 688
White collar offences, 30, 32, Chap-
ter 21

White Papers; see Home Office
White Papers
Witchcraft trials, 695
Wolfenden Report, 39, 40-1, 53
Women; see Female criminality
Working classes, 437-40; 445, 448;
see also Class, social, of
offenders. Culture and sub-
culture

List of Statutes and Bills cited

I. ENGLISH (in chronological
order)

Licensing Act 1872, 246-7
Trial of Lunatics Act 1883, 343
Criminal Lunatics Act 1884, 343,
348

Prevention of Crime Act 1908, 223,
656

Official Secrets Act 1911, 706
Criminal Justice Act 1925, 692
Legitimacy Acts 1926 and 1959,
619, 623

Mental Deficiency Act 1927, 271-2
Children and Young Persons Act
1933, 206

Infanticide Act 1938, 692
Criminal Justice Act 1948, 142, 266,
343, 656, 695

Children and Young Persons
(Harmful Publications) Act 1955,
604

Homicide Act 1957, 117, 344, 349
Mental Health Act 1959, Chapter 1 8
Protection of Depositors Act 1963,
442

Contracts of Employment Act
1963,439

Drugs (Prevention of Misuse) Act
1964, 256

Monopolies and Mergers Bill 1965,
490

H. FOREIGN (in alphabetical
order)

Austria, 23, 692
Cuba, 655, 670, 692
Denmark, 266-7, 342, 350, 366,
460

Ethiopia, 23
France, 23, 660

Germany (incl. Draft Code), 23-4,
40, 51, 57-9, 168, 295, 350, 366,
369, 651, 654, 670, 692
Italy, 298, 349, 366, 655
Poland, 23

Soviet Russia, 366, 638
Switzerland, 23, 366, 670
U.S.A.; see Subject Index under
New Hampshire Rule, Durham
Rule

777

List of Cases cited

(in alphabetical order)

Arnold, 339
Beard, 349

Bentley and Craig, 639
Dent, 52
Durham, 342
Hadfield, 339
Heath, 333
Holmes, 40

M°Naghten, 339 ff.

McCrorey, 345

Mignonette, 40

Murray and Grunwald, 487-9

Podola, 348

Shaw, 56

Straffen, 341

Ward, 701

778

Index of Names

Abraham, Gerald, 281, 404
Abraham, Karl, 410
Abrahamsen, David, 303, 327, 358,
394, 399-409, 411
Ackoff, Russell L., 378, 389
Adams, Sherman, 495, 722
Adler, Alfred, 159, 323, 329-31,
412, 612, 737
Adorno, T., 408
Agar, Herbert, 646, 741
Aichhom, August, 409, 607, 736
Ainsworth, Mary D., 622, 738
Akers, Ronald L., 374
Alexander, Franz, 157, 320, 322-3,
326, 399, 407, 410; and Healy,
William, 354, 359, 382, 409
Alihan, M. A., 724
Allaun, Frank, 431
Allen, Francis A., 24, 221, 364, 392,
413

Allport, F. H., 647, 742, 750
Allport, G. W„ 294, 354, 381-4,
406, 719

Althusius, Johannes, 62
Amelunxen, C., 746
Ancel, Marc, 302, 407, 413
Andersen, C. H., 353, 379
Andry, R. G., 92, 127, 371-2, 378,
617-18, 713, 736, 738
Angell, Sir Norman, 718
Anthony, E. J., 735
Antoni, Carlo, 367, 383
Arendt, Hannah, 746
Argyle, Michael, 74, 388, 735
Aristotle, 42-3, 574, 731
Aschaffenburg, Gustav, 203, 391
Austin, John, 47, 362

Baba, Yoshitsugu, and Nakano,
Tsugio, 748

Bader, Karl, 595, 733-4
Baier, Kurt, 368
Baker, John Newman, 734
Ball, A. J. Loughborough, 733
Ballak, Leopold, and Holt, Robert,
395

Banbury, J., 387
Banton, Michael, 727
Barnes, H. E., and Teeters, Negley
K., 362, 366, 376, 390, 393, 724,
730; see also Teeters
Barry, Sir John Vincent, 372
Bartholomew, Allen A., 412
Bartz, Hans, 377

Baschwitz, Kurt, 634, 695, 740, 749
Beattie, Ronald H., 353, 377, 747
Becker, Howard, 166, 384, 386-7
Beermann, R., 497-8, 722
Behan, Brendan, 383
Bell, Daniel, 743
Bell, David, 724

Bemmelen, J. M. van, 18, 97, 353,
363, 374, 390, 571, 716, 725, 730,
740, 748

Benjamin, JohnD., 381
Benney, Mark, 383, 590, 728, 732
Benson, Sir George, 380, 685-6,
714,748

Bentham, Jeremy, 47, 79, 84, 221
Berg, Irwin August, and Fox,
Vernon, 407

Berker, Paul de, 269-70, 304, 402
Berkowitz, Leonard, 359, 408, 735
Berlin, Sir Isaiah, 413, 718
Bernard, L. L., 388
Bernstein, Basil, 718

INDEX OF NAMES

Bettelheim, Bruno, 155, 382, 409
Beutel, Frederick K„ 183, 355, 387,
476, 722

Beveridge, W. I. B., 177, 355, 386
Beveridge, Sir W., 393
Beynon, E, D., 541, 726
Bianchi, H., 29, 31, 352, 362, 363,
365-6, 373, 425, 570, 709, 712,
717, 730

Binder, Julius, 363-4, 367
Binding, Karl, 12
Bimbach, Martin, 409
Bjerre, Andreas, 159, 300, 304,
358, 365, 407
Blackett, P. M. S., 387
Blackstone, Sir William, 27, 29,
47,364

Blau, Gunter, 734
Bleuler, E., 252, 398
Bloch, Herbert A., 399, 481, 512,
710, 714, 716, 720-1, 723, 740,
743

Blumer, Herbert, 158, 383; and
Hauser, Philip M., 734
Bodenheimer, Edgar, 352, 362,
365, 367-8, 370
Bogue, Donald J., 728
Bonger, W. A., 96-7, 213, 222,
374, 390-2, 404, 567, 585, 705,
712, 716, 725, 729, 731
Boorstin, Daniel J., 720
Booth, Charles, 731
Bordua, David J., 519, 666, 723,
743

Boskoff, Alvin, 387
Boslow et ah, 401
Bovet, Lucien, 735
Bowers, A. M., 409
Bowlby, John, 168, 260, 328, 354,
385, 400, 411, 620-2, 738
Bowley, Sir Arthur L., 98
Braithwaite, R. B., 370
Branham, Vernon C., and Kutash,
Samuel, 377

Brayfield, Arthur H., 380
Brearley, H. C„ 34, 205, 365, 37 9,
390, 406

Brittan, Samuel, 717

Britton, Karl, 361

Bronner, Augusta, 157, 356, 736;

see also Healy, William
Brousseau, A., 246, 396
Brown, J. A. C., 359, 409-13, 718
Brown, Sybil Clement, 379
Bruce, Andrew A., Burgess, Ernest
W., and Harno, Albert J., 381
Buber, Martin, 280-1, 404, 410,
741

Bullock, H. A., 566, 730
Bunyan, John, 159
Burchardt, Hans Hermann, 548-9,
725

Burckhardt, Jacob, 404, 422, 716
Burgess, Ernest W., 146, 148, 157,
365, 479, 722

Burt, Sir Cyril, 8-9, 79, 126, 204,
207-8, 230, 249, 279, 280, 301,
356, 358, 361, 378, 382, 390,
396, 400, 402-3, 578, 601, 614,
623, 629, 703, 711, 714-15, 724,
726, 734, 738, 750
Burtt, H. E., 733
Buss, Arnold, 408
Bussy, Dorothy, 406

Cabot, Richard Clarke, 178-9, 362
Cahn, Edmond, 367-8, 408
Cairns, Sir David, 722
Caldwell, Charles, 212, 405
Caldwell, Robert G., 721
Callcott, Mary Stevenson, 681, 703,
747,750

Camus, Albert, 302, 456, 503, 710
Cantor, Nathaniel, 20, 363
Cantrill, H., 740
Carstairs, G. M., 728, 736, 747
Carter, M. P., 711, 724
Cattell, Raymond, 294, 406, 717
Cavan, Ruth, Hauser, Philip, and
Stouffer, Samuel, 382, 383
Chapin, F. Stuart, 175-6, 182, 355,
386

Chein, Isidor, 399
Chessman, Caryl, 160, 383
Christiansen, Karl O., 593
Christoph, James B., 741

780

INDEX OF NAMES

Stafford-Clark, David, 296, 357,
379, 395, 398-9, 400-2, 413
Clarke, J., 400
Clccklcy, H., 400
Clemmer, Donald, 158, 196, 308,
355, 383, 388, 408, 644, 716, 741
Clifford, William, 160, 354, 383,
697

Clinard, Marshall B., 30-1, 93,
167, 287-9, 352, 364-5, 370-1,
374, 375-6, 385, 389, 397, 405,
410, 551,710-11,713,716,719-21,
725-6, 733, 735, 739
Cloward, Richard E., and Ohlin,
Lloyd A., 255, 380, 399, 512-20,
711, 714, 717, 723, 730, 743
Cohen, Albert K., 129, 351, 365,
378, 462, 507-12, 521-2, 706,
710-11, 724, 743
Cohen, Joseph, 356, 390
Cohen, Morris R., and Nagel,
Ernest, 371
Coleman, John, 718
Collins, Philip, 404
Collison, Peter, 718
Comte, Auguste, 222
Connolly, Cyril, 302
Cooke, Deryk, 723
Blom-Cooper, Louis, 171, 295, 385,
406-7, 414, 714, 745
Cormier, Bruno M., 299, 407, 689,
746

Comil, Paul, 671-2, 745
Coser, L. A., 718
Cowan, Thomas A., 183, 387
Craft, Michael, 268, 358, 384,
400-1

Craig and Beaton, 396, 405
Cranston, Maurice, 411
Cressey, Donald R., 15, 33, 134,
170, 192, 287, 292, 296, 310, 355,
358, 362, 365, 379, 382, 385,
389, 405-6, 409, 710, 713, 716,
722, 732, 734
Critchley, Macdonald, 412
Croft, J. J., 195, 383, 389, 633, 740
Cross, Rupert, and Jones, Asterley,
366, 375, 397

Crow, Lester B., and Crow, Alice,
736

Dahrendorf, Ralf, 445 ff., 709,
718, 723

Dale, Edgar, 734
Darwin, Charles, 214, 216, 319
Daube, David, 35, 366
Davenport, Nicholas, 717
Davies, D. Seaborne, 396
Dearborn, Walter F., 380
Debuyst, Christian, 378, 382, 400,
625, 631, 736-7, 739
Denning, Lord, 255, 399
Devanandan, P. D., and Thomas,
M. M., 736

Devlin, Mr. Justice (now Lord),
52-7, 368-9, 439
Dexter, Edwin G., 204, 390
Diamond, A. S., 35, 364-5
Dilthey, Wilhelm, 4, 360
Disraeli, Benjamin (Lord Beacons-
field), 545-6

Dolci, Danilo, 586, 661, 732
Dollard, John, et al., 158, 383, 408,
454, 710, 719, 741
Donnelly, Richard C., 364
Donnelly, Goldstein and Schwartz,
746

Dostoevsky, Feodor, 159, 309-10,
322, 382

Doust, J. W. Lovett, 401
Downes, D. M., 670, 711
Downey, Bernard W. M., 746
Dreher, Eduard, 369, 720, 740
Driver, Edwin D., 356, 393, 404
Drucker, Peter, 485, 646, 741
Ducpetiaux, Edouard, 574, 731
Dugdale, Richard, 229
Dumas, Alexandre, 749
Dunham, Warren, 167, 385, 398
Dunne, Laurence, R., 435, 741
Duns Scotus, 44

Durant, Ruth, 736; see also Glass,
Ruth

Durkheim, Emile, 9, 12, 55, 135,
171, 284, 361-2, 379, 385, 404,
500-3, 611, 711, 717, 723, 736

781

INDEX OF NAMES

East, Sir Norwood, 34, 79-80, 178,
209, 213, 230, 244, 249, 259, 275,
356-8, 365, 386, 390-1, 393,
396-400, 403-4, 406-7, 705, 732,
747; and de Hubert, 260
Eastman, Max, 327
Eddington, Sir A. S., 361
Edwards, J. LI. J., 346, 414-15
Edwards, Lyford P., 733
Lange-Eichbaum, Wilhelm, 279,
358, 403

Eilenberg, M. D., 208, 356, 390
Eisenstadt, S. N., 730
Eliot, T. S., 421, 709
Ellenberger, Henri, 671, 745
Elies, G. W., 359, 409
Elliott, Mabel A.. 353, 377, 379, 397,
691, 715-16, 726, 732, 748, 750
Ellis, Havelock, 226, 280, 319, 392,
736

Emery, F. E., 735
Engels, Friedrich, 61
England, Ralph W., 724
d’Entreves, A. P., 41-3, 46, 352,
368

Epps, Phyllis, 691, 748
Escalona and Heider, 151, 380-1
Estabrook, A. H., 229
Exner, Franz, 4, 230, 360, 390,
393-4, 397, 401, 533, 567-8,
595, 725, 729, 732-3, 738
Eysenck, H. J., 163, 289, 294, 332,
354, 358, 383, 402, 405-6, 409,
412, 718-19, 739

Faulks, Neville, 488, 722
Feber, G. H. A., 730
Ferguson, T., 208, 277, 356, 390,
403, 558, 561

Ferracuti, Franco, 287, 359, 406,
604, 724

Ferrero, Gina Lombroso-, 215
Ferrero, Guglielmo, 215, 748
Ferri, Enrico, 203, 214, 218-20,
336, 392, 575, 731
Feuerbach, Anselm von, 282 ;
Field, Jack G., 378
Fielding, Henry, 660

Fink, Arthur E., 229, 356, 384,
391, 393, 402-3
Fisher, R. A., 177, 386
Fitch, J. H., 463, 720, 747
Fluegel, J. C., 313, 317, 320, 327,
366, 402, 409, 410-12, 740
Ford, Richard, 734
Forder, Anthony, 745
Fordham, Frieda, 412
Fordham, Peta, 743
Forsyth, David, 409
Fortas, Abe, 490-1, 722
Fortes, M., 612, 737
Foulkes, S. H., 313-14, 359, 407,
409-10, 735
Fox, Sir Lionel, 390
Fox, Sanford J., 397
Fox, Tylor, 396
Frankel, Emil, 377
Frankenstein, Carl, 385
Franklin, Marjorie E., 409
Franks, C. M., 266, 332, 400-1, 412
Frazer, Sir James, 319, 366, 399
Frazier, E. Franklin, 565
Fredriksson, Gunnar, 353, 374
Freud, Sigmund, 166, 258-9, 260,
306, Chapter 17, 336, 358-9, 382,
399, 408, 410, 413, 504, 740, 749
Frey, Erwin, 19, 139, 166, 363-4,
379, 384, 401, 684, 747
Freyhan, Fritz A., 399
Freytag, Gustav, 422
Friedlander, Kate, 318, 358, 359,
382, 384, 394, 399, 409-10, 615, ,
736

Friedmann, Wolfgang, 183, 351,
362, 368-9, 387, 440, 483, 717,
722,736

Fromm, Erich, 405, 412, 607, 736
Fry, Margery, 397
Fuller, Lon L., 58, 352, 368-9
Fuller, Ronald, 660, 743
Fumeaux, Rupert, 4 1 5
Fyvel, T. R., 305, 434, 530-1, 709,
711, 717, 742

Galbraith, J. K., 432-3, 709, 717
Gall, Franz Joseph, 212

INDEX OF NAMES

Game, w. B., 363
Galton, Sir Francis, 231, 279, 403
Garavaglia, Gianfranco, et al., 726
Garbett, William, 395
Gardikas, 397

Gardiner, Gerald (now Lord), 747
Garofalo, Rafaele, 31, 214, 392
Gartner, Lloyd P., 538, 726
Gee, Wilson, 352, 372-3, 386, 388
Geerds, Friedrich, 380
Geiger, Theodor, 740, 742
Geis, Gilbert, 399, 481, 491, 710,
714, 716, 720-1, 740
Genet, Jean, 160, 383, 407
Gerrard, Nathan L., 667, 745
Gibbens, T. C. N., 261, 354, 356-
358, 376, 379, 385, 389, 396-7,
400-2, 543, 674, 700, 715, 720,
740, 746

Gibbon, Don C., and Garrity,
Donald L., 385

Gibbs, Jack P., 171, 354, 384-5
Gibson, Evelyn, 372, 727, 744
Gide, Andre, 161, 296-7, 300, 309-
310, 383, 409

Gierke, Otto von, 62, 367, 369-70
Gillespie, R. D., 357-8, 395-6, 398-
399, 400

Gillin, John L., 133, 365, 378, 407
Ginsberg, Morris, 51, 56, 221,

314, 329, 352, 362, 365, 368-9,
373, 383, 392, 402-5, 409-10,
411,413,717,722, 730

Gittler, Joseph, 716, 723, 740
Glaser, Daniel, 127, 286, 378, 405,
588,732

Glass, D.V., 449, 709, 718
Glass, Ruth, 543, 545, 712, 727
Glatt, M. M., 249, 357, 397
Gleispach, W., 362
Glover, Edward, 153, 166, 257,
259-61, 264-5, 268, 304, 309,

315, 317, 326, 352, 357-9, 373,
376, 380-2, 384, 399-401, 403,
407-9, 413, 707, 733, 737, 750

Glueck, Bernard, 202
Glueck, Eleanor, 540; see also
Glueck, S. and E.

Glueck, Sheldon, 355, 359, 374,

381, 388, 413, 713-14, 734, 739;
see also Glueck, S. and E.

Glueck, S. and E., 10, 79, 90-1,
131, 136-8, 145, 147-9, 154,
159, 165, 169, 187, 210, 240-1,
273, 286, 292-3, 304-5, 351-4,
356, 358, 360-1, 372-3, 378-80,

382, 384-5, 388-9, 391, 395, 402,
405, 408, 622, 627, 630, 632, 683,
685, 713, 715, 724, 735-6, 738-9,
745, 747

Goddard, Henry H., 229, 274, 393,
402

Goebel, Julius, 365
Godwin, George, 398
Gold, Martin, 724
Goldkuhl, Erik, 402
Goldschmidt, James, 369
Goldschmidt, Walter, 716
Goldthorpe, John H., 448, 718
Golla, F. L., and Hodge, S., 236,
394

Goodeve, Sir Charles, 386
Goodhart, A. L., 364, 368-9, 415
Goodman, Geoffrey, 439
Gordon, R. G., 396
Gordon-Harris-Rees, 394
Goring, Charles, 79-80, 130, 209,
227-8, 274-6, 283, 391, 403
Gorki, Maxim, 306
Gough, Harrison G., 139, 289, 405
Gower, L. C. B., 721
Grant, Andrew, 718
Grant, J. Douglas, 194, 389
Grassberger, Roland, 16, 362, 365,
685, 692, 748

Graven, Jean, 363, 369, 716
Gray, Howard, 402
Greeff, Etienne de, 298, 307-8,
310, 407-8

Green, John Richard, 744
Greenwood, Ernest, 132, 174-6,
353, 355, 370, 378, 386-8
Griswold, Erwin, 743
Gross, Hans, 16, 283, 362, 716
Grotius, Hugo, 44-5, 53
Gruhle, Hans W., 283, 396

783

INDEX OF NAMES

Griinhut, Max, 353, 372, 374, 377,
392, 401, 414, 740
Grygier, Tadeusz, 195, 197, 289-91,
304-5, 308, 358, 389, 405, 518,
602, 729, 733, 735
Guercio, Francis M., 661, 743-4
Guerry, A. M., 79, 98, 119
Guerry de Champneuf, 203
Gunther, John, 327
Gurwitz, Milton, 384, 400-1
Guttmacher, M., 394
Gwinner, Heinrich, 374, 423, 464,
696, 730, 740, 744

Haas, A. M. Lorentz de, 357, 396
Hacker, Erwin, 730
Hagemann, Max, 569, 730, 748
Hakeem, Michael, 357, 395
Halbwachs, M., 374
Hall, Jerome, 25-6, 39, 41, 352,
359-60, 363-4, 366-8, 412-13,
424, 465, 710, 744
Hall, J., and Jones, D. Caradog,
722

Hammond, W. H., and Chayen,
Edna, 372, 744, 747
Hare, Richard, 719
Hart, H. L. A., 53, 55-8, 352, 360,
368, 369

Hart, Hornell, 387
Hartshome, Hugh, and May, Mark
A., 163, 704, 750
Hartung, Frank E., 721
Harvey, Audrey, 717
Hathaway, S. R., Monachesi, E. D.,
Young, L. A., 405
Hauser, Philip M., 544; see also
Blumer and Hauser
Havard, J. D. J., 109, 375
Hawley, Amos H., 724
Hayner, Norman S., 737
Healy, William, 8-9, 156, 210, 229,
322-3, 357, 359, 361, 382, 391,
707 ; see also Healy and Bronner
Healy, William, and Bronner,
Augusta, 354, 379, 399, 409,
704

Heldmann, H. H., 413, 749
Hellmer, Joachim, 385, 656, 683,
744, 747

Henderson, Sir David, 166, 264,
357-8, 396, 398, 400-1, 750
Henry, G.W., 398
Hentig, Hans von, 112, 155, 160,
171, 296, 365, 374-6, 383, 385,
397, 406-7, 566, 639, 642-3,
675, 712, 714, 729, 732-3, 739-41,
744-5, 748
Heyworth, Lord, 83
Hibbert, Christopher, 650, 743
Hilgard, E. R., 412
Hill, Denis, 245, 386, 396
Hill, Matthew Davenport, 552, 560
Himmelweit, Hilde B., 603, 735,
Hirschmann, Johannes, 383-4
His, Rudolf, 413
Hobbes, Thomas, 44-5, 48
Hobsbawm, E. J., 743
Hocking, William Ernest, 368
Hoebel, E. Adamson, 413
Hofstatter, Peter R., 735, 740, 742
Hoggart, Richard, 450, 718, 720,
723, 736

Holdsworth, Sir William, 364, 414
Hollingsworth, Leta, 280, 358, 403
Hollitscher, Walter, 409-10
Holzner, Burkart, 711
Homans, George C., 714, 735-6,
740

Honore, A. M., 360
Hood, Roger G., 461, 720
Hooton, Earnest, 217, 228, 239,
382, 391-3

Horst, Paul, et ah, 354, 380-2
Hoskins, R. G., 394
Howard, D. L., 740
Howard, John, 79, 84, 364, 383
Hoyles, J. Arthur, 730
Hsu, Francis L. K., et al . , 616, 737
Hubert, W. H. de B., 357, 395, 398
Hudig, Johanna C., 691, 704, 748
Hugo, Victor, 404
Hughes, R. Moelwyn, 742
Hurwitz, Stephan, 594, 725, 739
Huxley, Julian, 392, 394

Hegel, G. W. F., 47-8, 368

784

INDEX OF NAMES

Ibsen, Henrik, 310, 702, 707

Jackson, Brian, and Marsden,
Dennis, 450-2, 511, 710
Jackson, Don D., 398
Jackson, Robert, H., 743
Jacoby, Jolan, 412
Jager, Herbert, 729
James, John, 194, 356, 389, 713,
735

Jaspers, Karl, 262, 414

Jeffery, Clarence Ray, 392, 599,

734

Jellinek, Georg, 13, 45, 49, 51, 368,
369

Jenkins, R. L., 168, 385
Jephcott, A. P., 711, 724
Jescheck, H. H., 363
Jessner, Lucie, and Pavenstedt,
Eleanor, 381

Johnson, Earl, 662, 743
Johnson, Harry M., 713, 717-18,

735

Joly, Henri, 726
Jonasson, C., 554, 728
Jones, Ernest, 408, 411
Jones, Howard, 162, 249, 357,
381-2, 384, 390, 398, 402, 551,
557, 627, 710, 715, 721, 724-5,
729, 732, 738-40, 746
Pryre-Jones, Alan, 386
Jonnfes, Moreau de, 118
Joyce, C. A., 333

Jung, C. G., 162-3, 166, 331-3, 354,
383, 412, 413, 620, 738, 742

Kahn, Alfred J., 372
Kaiser, Gunther, 650-1, 741
Kan,J.van,731
Kallmann, Franz J., 233, 394
Kant, Immanuel, 22, 46-7, 49, 363,
368

Kantorowicz, Hermann, 37, 49,
352, 366, 368-9

Kanun, Clara, and Monachesi,
Elio D., 405
Kardiner, A., 716

Karpman, Ben, 155, 382, 409, 413

Kay, Brian, 181, 305, 355, 387,
408

Keen, Maurice, 583
Keeton, G. W., 359, 415
Kefauver, Estes, 743
Kelsen, Hans, 44, 338, 352, 362,
367-9, 408, 411

Kempe, G. Th., 379, 390, 571,
725, 730

Kennedy, Alexander, 398
Kenny, C. S., and Turner, J. W. C.,
27, 338, 351, 360-1, 363-5, 369,
413-14, 720, 740, 743, 745
Kephart, William M., 376, 720
Kerawalla, Perin C., 550, 732
Kielholz, Arthur, 366
Kimbal, George E., 387-8
Kinberg, Olof, 394, 736
Kirby, Bernard C., 380
Kitsuse, John I., and Dietrick,
T) C

Klare, Hugh J., 713
Klein, Josephine, 735
Kleist, Heinrich von, 63, 307, 583
Klineberg, Otto, 727
Klingender, F. D., 395
Kluckhohn, Clyde, 736
Kobrin, Solomon, 188, 355, 388,
559, 725, 728
Koenig, Samuel, 726
Koppenfels, Sebastian von, 748
Kornitzer, Margaret, 408
Kraepelin, Emil, 250, 252
Krause, Werner F. J., 400
Kretschmer, Ernst, 152, 162-3,
236-40, 251-2, 279-80, 354,
357-8, 384, 394-5, 403-4, 682,
692, 747

Kropotkin, Prince Peter, 204
Kvaraceus, William C., 633, 739

Lacassagne, A., 422, 716
Laing, R. D., 323, 41 1
Ave-Lallement, F. C. B., 422, 716
Lampedusa, Guiseppe da, 666
Lamson, David, 160, 383
Landecho, Carlos Maria de, S.J.,
394

ccn — sb

785

INDEX OF NAMES

Lander, Bernard, 506-7, 711, 728-9
Lange, Johannes, 231-3, 252, 268,
301, 357, 393, 398, 401, 407
LaPiere, R. T., 714, 740
Laubscher, B. J. F., 413
Laune, Ferris F., 185, 388
Lavater, J. K., 212
Leaute, Jacques, 379
Le Bon, Gustave, 645-9, 714, 740
Lecky, W. E. H., 422
Ledig, Gerhard, 404
Lees, J. P., and Newson, L. J., 612,
737

Leferenz, H., 401
Lejins, Peter, 360-1'

Lejour, G., and Racine, A., 400
Lenz, Adolf, 239, 407
Lenz, Edgar, 745

Leopold, Nathan, 160, 194, 354,
383, 389, 407

Leppmann, Friedrich, 395-6
Levi, Carlo, 586, 732
Levi, Leone, 535
Levin, Yale, 725
Levit, S. G., 393

Lewis, Sir Aubrey, 73, 89-90, 244,
252, 358, 371, 373, 399
Lewis, E. O., 402
Lewis, Norman, 744
Liepmann, Moritz, 595, 733
Lindesmith, Alfred R., 8, 167, 351,
357, 361, 365, 385, 399, 710, 725,
743, 745

Lindner, Robert M., 359, 407, 409
Lindzey, Gardner, 412
Lippmann, Werner O., 409
Little, Alan, 332, 412
Little, K. L., 727

Llewellyn, K. N., and Hoebel,
E. Adamson, 366
Locke, John, 46, 62, 370
Lockwood, David, 363, 448
Lodge, T. S., 375-6
Lombroso, Cesare, 8, 79, 85, 156,
164, 203, 213-29, 236, 238, 245,
279-80, 283, 317-18, 391, 393,
403, 405, 575, 633, 700-2, 708,
731,748

Lorand, Sandor, 409-10
Lundberg, George A., 355, 386-8
Lunden, Walter A., 369, 733
Lunt, Paul S., 376
Luther, Martin, 64
Lynch, G. W., 192, 583

MacCalman, D. R., 358, 400
Maclay, David T., 358, 400
McClelland, David C., 717
McClintock, F. H., 727, 744, 747
Mack, J. A., 739
McCord, William and Joan, 133,
210, 275, 353, 358, 378-9, 391,

400- 1, 403, 612, 615, 713, 736
McCorkle, Lloyd, et al . , 355, 386
McCormick, Thomas C., and Fran-
cis, Roy G., 380, 382-3

Macdonnell, Sir John, 375
McDougall, William, 303, 407-9,
644, 719, 740
McGrath, W. T., 729
McGregor, O. R., 372, 736, 738;

and Rowntree, Griselda, 738-9
MacIntyre, A. C., 409-10
Mclver, R. M„ 9-10, 351, 361, 388
Mackay, G. W., 402
McKay, Henry, 711, 724; see also
Shaw, Clifford R.

McKenzie, G., 41 1
McKinney, John C., 355, 387-8
McNiven, Angus, 357, 396-8
McRae, Donald G., 371
Mack, John A., 656, 728, 744
Maconochie, Alexander, 85
Madge, John, 354-5, 371, 377-8,
382, 386-7, 389, 395
Maine, Sir Henry, 35, 365
Maitland, J., 387
Malinowski, Bronislaw, 20, 352,
363, 366

Mannheim, Hermann, 12, 18-19,
25, 55, 61, 67, 86, 115, 132, 222,
335, 351, 353, 355-7, 359-67,
369, 371-82, 384-7, 389-95, 397,

401- 4, 406, 408, 41 1-15, 470, 513,
683, 697-8, 709-13, 715, 717,
721-6, 731-3, 738-9, 748-9'

786

INDEX OF NAMES

Mannheim, Karl, 750
Mannzen, Walter, 572, 730
Manouvrier, L., 218
Mapother, Edward, and Lewis,
Aubrey, 244, 252, 259, 357-8,
395-400, 402-3; see also Lewis,
Aubrey

Marcus, B., 293, 402, 406
Marsh, R. G. Blake, 277
Marshall, T. H., 19, 363, 709, 718
Martin, E. D., 741
Martin, J. P., 370, 372, 390
Marx, Karl, 444-6, 500
Mason, Philip, 742
Masur, Gerhard, 730
Matheson, J. C. M., 396
Matza, David, 516, 674, 711, 723-4
Maudsley, Henry, 216, 226, 392,
405

Mayer, J. P., 734
Mayer, Max Ernst, 368
Mayhew, Henry, 79, 422, 575
Maynard, Sir John, 411
Mayr, Georg von, 376, 576-7, 731
Mays, John B., Ill, 130, 189, 355,
376, 387-8, 528-30, 629, 711, 714,
723-4, 738-9, 740
Meehl, Paul, 150, 354, 384
Meinecke, Friedrich, 62
Mendelsohn, B., 745
Meng, Heinrich, 401, 411
Menninger Foundation, 151
Mergen, Armand, 370
Merrill, Francis E., 397, 726, 750
Merrill, Maud A., 126, 378, 391, 408
Merton, Robert K., 72, 129, 323,
352, 370-1, 378, 388, 456-7,
501-5, 606-7, 710-11, 721, 724,
735-6

Meyer, Fritz, 380
Mezey, A. G., 726
Mezger, Edmund, 236, 238, 385,
391, 394-5, 401, 568, 730
Michael, Jerome, and Adler, Morti-
mer J., 20, 31, 363
Middendorff, Wolf, 380, 406, 467,
632, 716, 720, 733, 738-9, 748,
750

Mill, John Stuart, 6, 9
Miller, Arthur S., 485
Miller, Emanuel, 324, 358, 400,
405, 411,611,734,736
MiUer, Walter B., 522-3, 724
MiUer, Walter N., 388
Mins, Wright C., 473, 591, 718,
721, 733

Milner, K. O., 250, 277, 358, 398,
403

Monachesi, Elio D. ; see Hathaway
and Kanun

Montagu, Ashley, 232, 357, 389,
391, 394

More, Sir Thomas, 574, 731
Moreno, J. L., 195, 389, 735
Morgan, John, 732
Moroney, M. J., 97, 353, 371, 374,
377, 571,730

Morris, Norval, 194, 209-10, 342,

355, 364, 377, 382, 386, 389-91,
393, 413-14, 564, 627, 685, 733,
739, 748

Morris, Pauline, 74, 193, 210, 255,

356, 371-2, 389, 391, 408, 625,
713, 730, 735

Morris, Ruth R., 715, 750
Morris, Terence P., 74, 98, 171,
193, 210, 255, 295, 356, 371-2,
374, 385-6, 389, 391, 406-7, 414,
462, 531, 625, 711-14, 720, 724,
730, 735, 745
Morrison, D. R. L,, 380
Morrison, W. D., 207, 390, 620,
727, 738

Morse, Phihp M., 387-8
Morton, H. V., 408
Moser, C. A., 353, 377
Mossiker, Frances, 749
Mottram, V. H., 394
Mowrer, O. H., 455, 710, 719
Moynihan, Lord, 178
MueUer, Gerhard O. W., 360,
364, 396-7, 399, 414
Muir, Edwin, 162, 383
Mukerjee, Radhakamal, 724
MuUer, N., 191
Muhins, Claud, 623, 738

787

INDEX OF NAMES

Murchison, Carl, 276, 392, 402-3
Murphy, Gardner, et al., 382, 386,
426, 703, 717-19, 737, 742, 750
Murray, H. A., 405
Mussen Paul H., 386
Myrdal, Gunnar, 78, 86, 93, 352,
366, 370-2, 373-4, 424-6, 709,
717,750

Naess, Siri, 622, 738
Nagel, W. H., 572, 711, 725, 730,
745

Naucke, W., 743

Neustatter, Lindesay W., 397, 400,
414

Newman, Donald J., 473, 721
Newman, H. H., 356, 393
Niederhoffer, Arthur, 723
Nietzsche, Friedrich, 339
Nobile, Carmelo, 663, 744
Normanton, Helena, 734
Notestein, Wallace, 749
Nott, Kathleen, 716
Nyquist, Ola, 111, 376

Ockham, William of, 44
O’Connell, Brian A., 253, 397-9
Oettingen, A. von, 750
Ogburn, William F., and Nimkoff,
Meyer F., 366, 390, 571, 714,
716, 723, 736, 740, 742
Ogden, D. A., 170, 354, 384-5
Ohlin, Lloyd E„ 146-8, 354, 380-1,
399, 711, 717; see also Cloward
and Ohlin

Orgler, Hertha, 412
Osborne, Thomas Mott, 193
Overholser, Winfred, 401

Packard, Vance, 446, 455, 709-10,
718-20, 737

Page, Sir Leo, 158, 383
Pailthorpe, Grace W., 80, 275, 354,.

383, 403, 691, 707, 748
Pakenham, Lord (now Earl of
Longford), 353, 375
Panakal, J. J., et al., 725
Park, R, E.. et al, 728

Parker, Seymour, 401
Parker, Tony, 155, 382, 710, 719,
728, 740, 748
Parkhurst, Helen, 155
Parmelee, Maurice, 393
Parsons, Talcott, 724
Paton, G. W., 35, 366
Pearce, J. D. W., 211, 391
Pearson, Karl, 217, 227
Peijster, C. N., 376
Pellico, Silvio, 159
Penrose, Lionel, 394, 396, 402, 714,
741,750

Perry, Ethel, 409
Peters, Karl, 740
Peters, R. S., 406
Peterson, A. W., 414
Peterson, Donald R., 405
Philps, A. F., and Timms, N., 738
Piecha, Walter, 139, 379,385
Piercy, E. F., 195, 389
Pike, L. O., 422, 660, 749
Pinatel, Jean, 21, 298, 374, 407, 672,
728, 736-8, 740, 742-3, 748
Pitaval, F. G. de, 282
Plato, 42

Ploscowe, M., 397, 399
Plucknett, F. T., 364
Poliak, Otto, 692, 697, 704, 715,
748

Pond, D. A., 379, 402
Ponti, Gianluigi, 746
Popper, Karl R., 4, 6, 14, 20, 175,
177, 351-2, 355, 360-3, 373, 386
Porterfield, Austin L., 365, 375,
391, 462, 720
Pound, Roscoe, 367
Powers, Edwin, 355, 362, 378-9,
386, 388, 391, 737, 739
Prirp F W 395 -

Price,’ Joyce,’ 397, 400, 543, 674,
720, 746

Prichard, James C., 227, 263, 393
Prins, Herschel, 388
Biirger-Prinz, H., and Lewrenz, H.,
746

Prinzing, F., 626

Pufendorf, Samuel, 44-5, 62, 64, 66

788

INDEX OF NAMES

Quensel, Stephan, 407
Quetelet, Adolphe, 14, 96-7, 119,
203-4, 422, 685, 716, 750
Quiros, Bernaldo de, 362

Racine, Aimee, 400, 733
Radbruch, Gustav, 38, 49, 58,
364-6, 368-9, 374, 423, 464, 696,
730, 740, 744, 749
Radcliffe, Lord, 428-30, 709, 717
Radzinowicz, Leon, 173, 386, 660,
743

Raizen, Kenneth H., 382
Rangol, A. J., 746
Rankin, T. G., 738
Rao, S. Venugopala, 564, 728
Raper, Arthur, 729
Ratcliffe, T. A., 738
Ray, Isaac, 263, 270
Read, C. Stanford, 734
Reckless, Walter C„ 129, 139, 188,
256, 289, 353, 360-2, 376, 378,
379, 380-1, 384, 388, 393-4,
399, 405, 693, 714, 719, 724, 734,
736, 739

Reid, D. D., 373, 379, 386
Reid, John, 413
Reik, Theodor, 322, 41 1
Reiss, Albert J., 720
Reissman, Leonard, 709, 718
Reiwald, Paul, 407, 409, 411, 591,
732, 741

Renger, Ewald, 579, 731, 733
Repond, Andre, 321, 402, 411
Resten, Rene, 384
Lopez-Rey, Manuel, 380
Rheinstein, Max, and Shils, E.,
366, 383

Rhodes, E. C„ 80, 378, 390, 550,
728

Rhodes, Henry, T. F., 404, 740,
745-6

Rice, Stuart, 388
Rich, John, 168, 385
Richmond, Anthony H., 727
Riemer, Svend, 164, 384
Riesman, David, et al, 166, 385,
546, 718, 727

Ripolles, Antonio Quintano, 297
Robert, Henry, 749
Roche, Philip Q., 413
Roebuck, Julian B., 386
Roesner, Ernst, 118, 294, 365, 374,

377, 390, 406, 730-1, 733, 739,
746, 748

Rdheim, Geza, 318
Rolph, C. H., 414, 745
Rooy, H. van, 571, 725
Roper, W. F., 263, 304, 306, 399-
400, 402, 408
Rosanoff, A. J., 393
Rose, A. Gordon, 170, 195, 355,
356, 371-2, 377, 384, 389, 735,
746

Rose, Arnold M., 11, 92-3, 186,
351-2, 355, 361, 363, 371, 374,

378, 386, 387, 405, 740
Rose, Richard, 718
Rosenzweig, Saul, 289, 519
Ross, Sir David, 49, 308, 368
Rotberg, H. E., 363
Rothney, M., 380
Roucek, Joseph S., 716, 729, 739
Rowntree, Seebohm, et al., 731
Rubin, Sol, 133, 353^1, 379, 381
Rude, George, 648, 741
Ruitenbeek, Hendrik M., 409
Rumney, Jay, and Murphy, Joseph

P., 353, 379

Russell, Bertrand, 6, 217, 361, 392,
623, 738

El-Saaty, Hassan, 406, 725
St. Augustine, 44

St. John Stevas, Norman, 53, 352,
367, 369

St. Thomas Aquinas, 44, 367
Salisbury, Harrison E., 744
Sarbin, Theodore R., 380-1
Carr-Saunders, Sir A. M., et al
80, 378, 390, 739
Savitz, Leonard D., 537, 720, 727
Sayre, F. B., 364
Schachtel, Ernest G., 286, 292
Schafer, Stephen, 364
Lo Schiavo, Giovanni, 743
789

CCn-BB*

INDEX OF NAMES

Schiller, Friedrich, 283, 307, 321
Schlapp, Max G., and Smith,
Edward, 235, 394
Schlesinger, Benjamin, 738
Schmid, Calvin F., 725
Schmideberg, Melitta, 262, 329,
358, 400, 409, 411
Schneider, Kurt, 166, 264, 384, 401
Schonke, A., 720
Schrag, Clarence, 172, 385
Schuessler, Karl F., 287, 292, 351,
358, 361, 365, 405, 710
Schulz, H., 745

Schur, Edwin M., 254, 357, 399
Schwarz, Hedwig, 322, 326, 409,
691,748

Scott, G. M., 357, 397, 415
Scott, P. D., 384, 392-3, 401, 405,
617, 668, 714, 737, 744
Seelig, Ernst, 16, 167-8, 360, 362,
384, 395, 407, 730
Seligman, Brenda, 410
Sellin, Thorsten, 18, 20, 30, 79, 1 12,
118, 121, 353, 356, 362-3, 365,
372, 375, 376-7, 388, 392, 413,
539, 563, 586, 664, 685, 709, 712,
715, 717, 723, 726, 731, 747-8
Selltiz, Claire, ct al., 352-4, 355,
370, 374, 377, 378, 382, 386,
388-9

Selosse-Besson, 746
Shakespeare, William, 212, 283,
649

Shanks, Michael, 436-8, 442, 709,
717-18

Shaw, Bernard, 547
Shaw, Clifford R., 156-8, 187, 354,
382, 388, 397, 546, 552-4, 71 1-12,
724, 728, 737

Shawcross, Lord, 430-1, 605
Sheldon, William H., 154, 165,
240-1, 354, 357, 382, 384, 395,
409

Shepherd, Michael, 373, 398
Sherif, Muzafer, and Sherif, Caro-
lyn W., 607, 717, 736
Shield, J. Asa, and Grigg, Austin
E., 737

Shields, James, 393
Shoham, Shlomo, 522, 569, 712,
724, 730

Shulman, Harry Manuel, 387
Sieverts, Rudolf, 395
Sigal, Clancy, 720
Sighele, Scipio, 645, 700, 741, 749
Silcock, H., 375-6
Silving, Helen, 410
Simey, T. S., 449, 608, 629, 718,
736

Sinclair, Robert, 546, 727
Sletto, Raymond F., 737
Smelser, Neil J., 637, 648, 740
Smith, Adam, 545
Smith, Ann D., 694, 708, 715, 749
Abel-Smith, Brian, 732
Smith, M. Hamblin, 270
Smith, R. A., 722
Snell, H. K., 415
Snodgrasse, Richard M., 395
Socrates, 42

Sombart, Werner, 568, 730
Sondern, Frederick, 743
Sophocles, 45

Sorokin, Pitirim, 185, 374, 387-8,
391,724

Spencer, Herbert, 221
Spencer, John C., 92, 189-90, 197-
198, 352, 355, 373, 387-9,496-7,
556, 625, 667, 710, 712, 714, 721,
729, 744

Spergel, Irving, 725
Spieler, Helga Daniela, 380
Spinley, B. M., 716
Sprott, W. J. H., 379, 383, 389,
394, 644, 713-14, 724, 735, 746;
see also ‘Radby’ research (in
Subject Index)

Spurzheim, John Gaspar, 212
Stammler, Rudolf, 47
Starrs, James E., 364
Staub, Hugo, 322, 326, 357, 359,
384, 399, 407, 409-11
Stebbing, Susan, 351, 361
Stekel, Wilhelm, 327
Stephen, Sir James Fitzjames, 413
Stern, Edward S., 398

790

INDEX OF NAMES

Stofflet, E. H., 726
Storr, Anthony, 264-5
Stott, D. H., 168-9, 306, 355, 378-9,
380, 385, 598, 618, 633, 713, 734,

736- 7

Stouffer, Samuel A., 150, 164, 380-1
Strahl, Ivar, 111
Straus, Murray A., 718
Struthers, A. M., 375
Stumpfl, Friedrich, 233, 393-4
Stiirup, Georg, 266, 401
Sullenger, T. Earl, 738
Summers, Robert S., 369
Sutherland, Edwin H., 8, 30-1, 32-
33, 157, 275, 354, 361, 365, 383,
395, 402-3, 444, Chapter 21, 581,
599, 710, 713, 716, 720-1, 734
Sykes, Gresham, 193, 389, 408, 519,
674, 711, 713, 723-4, 735
Szabo, Denis, 541, 548, 725 ff.,

737- 8, 741

Taft, Donald R., 379, 388, 397,
586, 712, 716, 725
Talbert, Robert H., 365
Tappan, Paul W., 30, 32-3, 37, 360,
365-6, 479, 505-6, 710-11, 721,
725

Tarde,. Gabriel, 79, 218, 392, 453,
599, 719, 726, 740, 750
Tarnowsky, Pauline, 691, 748
Tawney, R. H., 571, 717, 730
Taylor, F. H., 296
Taylor, R. S., 354, 385
Teeters, Negley K., 366, 376; see
also Barnes and Teeters, and
Teeters and Reinemann
Teeters, N. K., and Reinemann,
Otto, 390, 734, 747
Terman, Lewis M., 403
Terstegen, O., 471, 721
Terstegen, O., and Zirpins, W., 721
Thomae, H., 404

Thomas, Dorothy S., 577-8, 581-2,
712,731

Thomas, W. I., 66, 157-8, 166, 303,
306, 308, 361, 382-4, 540, 726
Thomasius, Christian, 46

Thompson, J. W. M., 728
Thrasher, Frederick, 665-6, 714,
727,743

Titmuss, Richard, 442, 709, 717,
722, 750

Toby, Jackson, 359, 406, 411
Tobben, Heinrich, 262, 400
Tocqueville, Alexis de, 565
Tolstoy, L. N., 309, 648
Tong, John E., 402
Toulmin, Stephen, 5, 72, 352, 360,
370

Townsend, Peter, 436, 580, 717, 731
Trasler, Gordon, 371, 412, 426, 511,
716-18, 723

Tredgold, A. F., 280, 358, 402, 750
Trenaman, Joseph, 630, 732, 736,
739

Trevelyan, G. M., 422, 462, 720
Trotter, Wilfred, 740
Trottier, Michel, 641, 740
Tulchin, S. H., 402
Turnell, Martin, 394
Turner, Cynthia, 373, 386
Turner, M. L., 188-9, 355, 388, 667,
744

Uematsu, Tadashi, 729, 747

Veblen, Thorstein, 522
Verkko, Veli, 165, 248, 365, 384,
397, 407

Vexliard, A., 382, 719
Vine, Margaret S. Wilson, 710, 719
Voegele, G. E., and Dietze, H. J.,
399

Void, George B., 71, 370, 391, 410,
479-80, 578,581,599,710,712-13,
721, 725, 731

Volkart, Edmund H., 382, 384, 408
Vouin, Robert, and Leaute, Jacques,
14, 362, 638, 660, 680, 740

Wach, Joachim, 366
Wakefield, E. G., 734
Walder, Hans, 590, 733
Walker, Nigel, 74
Wallerstein, James C., Ill, 376

791

INDEX OF NAMES

Walters, A. A., 380-1, 687, 713,
734, 746

Warner, W. Lloyd, 376
Warren, Earl, 300
Warrender, Howard, 368
Wattenberg, W. W., and Balistieri,
J., 720

Way, Lewis, 412
Waycott, J. A., 412
Webb, S. and B., 388, 727
Weber, Hilda, 279, 358, 394, 402-3
Weber, Max, 4, 26, 39, 163, 360-1,
363, 366, 368, 383, 571, 730
Wedderburn, Dorothy, 731
Weeks, H. Ashley, 355, 386
Wehner, Bemd, 375-6
Weihofen, Henry, 359, 412-14
Weiner, Irving R., 641, 741
Welzel, Hans, 42-4, 367-8
Werfel, Franz, 671
Wertham, Frederic, 155, 354, 382,
409, 601-2, 735

West, D. L, 160, 210, 382-3, 626,
737, 739, 744

Westermarck, Eduard, 319
Wheatcroft, G. S. A., 493
Wheelan, Lorna, 357, 394, 401
Whyte, William Foote, 169, 186,
196, 385,388,711,714, 723
Wiener, Norbert, 91, 373
Wildeblood, Peter, 160
Wiley, Yerner, 390
Wilkins, Leslie T., 5, 10-11, 92,
351-2, 362-3, 370-4, 376-7, 380,
381, 387, 390, 403, 598, 685,
713, 715, 738, 746
WiUemse, W. A., 384
Willett, T. C, 163, 383, 466-7, 710
Williams, Lord Francis, 458-9, 719
Williams, Glanville, 24, 51, 59,
348-9, 351-2, 359-60, 363-4,

. 367, 369, 397, 412-15, 483, 639-
640, 714, 722, 740
Williams, J. E. Hall, 414
Williams, Raymond, 420, 523
Williams, Robin M., 648, 742
Price-Williams, D. R., 403, 406,
717

Prys Williams, G., 687, 746
Willmott, Peter, 731
Wills, David, 366, 740
Wilson, Colin, 310, 409
Wilson, Donald P., 194, 389
Wilson, Harriett C., 624, 713, 738
Wilson, Roger, 556-7, 721, 727-8
Winfield, P. H., 364
Wisdom, John O., 361
Witmer, Helen, 179, 355, 362, 378-
379, 386, 388, 391, 737, 739
Woddis, G. M.,252, 398
Wolf, Erik, 42, 363-4, 367-8
Wolf, Preben, 192, 459-60, 710, 718
Wolf, William, 394
Wolfe, W. Beran, 412
Wolfgang, Marvin E„ 171, 205,
213, 248, 287, 295, 353, 355-6,
359, 372, 374, 376, 378, 384-5,
390-3, 396-7, 403, 405-6, 673-4,
715, 724, 745, 747, 749
Wollheim, Richard, 421, 709
Wolzendorff, Kurt, 370
Wood, Arthur Evans, 381
Wood, Arthur Lewis, 572, 712, 729
Woodside, Moya, 691, 715, 749
Woodward, Mary, 275, 278, 358,
402-3

Woodworth, R. S., 393
Wootton, Barbara (Baroness
Wootton of Abinger), 265, 284,
287-8, 346, 352-3, 357-9, 373,
383, 395, 400-1, 404-5, 408,
412-13, 462, 467, 610, 612, 619,
621, 624, 690, 713, 715, 736,
738-9, 746, 748
Woytinski, W., 731
Wiirtenberger, Thomas, 60, 367,
373, 394, 464, 710, 720, 741
Wyle, Clement J,, 111, 376

Yablonski, Lewis, 666-7, 714, 744
Yamell, Helen, 400
Yeager, John G., 377
Yon Poh Seng, 377
Yoshimasu, Shufu, 233-4, 394
Yoshino, Roger, 714, 739
Young, Allyn A,, 373

792

INDEX OF NAMES

Young, H. T. P., 249, 394, 398
Young, Kimball, 167, 384, 713, 734,
740

Van der Zanden, James, 371
Zan will, O. L., 386

Zilboorg, Gregory, 398, 410
Znaniecki, Florian, 157-8, 382,
383, 540, 726
Zulliger, Hans, 411
Zweig, Ferdynand, 439-40, 449,
709, 718, 720

793

The International Library of

Sociology

and Social Reconstruction

Edited by W. J. H. SPROTT
Founded by KARL MANNHEIM

ROUTLEDGE & KEGAN PAUL

BROADWAY HOUSE, CARTER LANE, LONDON, E.C.4

CONTENTS

General Sociology

3

Sociology of Religion

9

Foreign Classics of Sociology

3

Sociology of Art and Literature

9

Social Structure

4

Sociology of Knowledge

9

Sociology and Politics

4

Urban Sociology

10

Foreign Affairs: Their Social, Poli-

Rural Sociology

10

tical and Economic Foundations

5

Sociology of Migration

11

Criminology

Social Psychology

5

6

Sociology of Industry and
Distribution

11

Sociology of the Family

7

Anthropology

12

The Social Services

7

Documentary

13

Sociology of Education

8

Reports of the Institute of

Sociology of Culture

9

Community Studies

14

International Library of Sociology

GENERAL SOCIOLOGY

Brown, Robert. Explanation in Social Science. 208 pp. 1963. {2nd Impression

1964. ) 25s.

Gibson, Quentin. The Logic of Social Enquiry. 240 pp. 1960. {2nd Impression
1963.) 24s.

Goldschmidt, Professor Walter. Understanding Human Society. 272 pp.
1959. 21s.

Homans, George C. Sentiments and Activities: Essays in Social Science.
336 pp. 1962. 32s.

Jarvie, I. C. The Revolution in Anthropology. Foreword by Ernest Gellner.

- 272 pp. 1964.40s.

Johnson, Harry M. Sociology: a Systematic Introduction. Foreword by
Robert K. Merton. 710 pp. 1961. {4th Impression 1964.) 42s.

Mannheim, Karl. Essays on Sociology and Social Psychology. Edited by Paul
Keckskemeti. With Editorial Note by Adolph Lowe. 344 pp. 1953. 30s.
Systematic Sociology: An Introduction to the Study of Society. Edited by
• J. S. Eros and Professor W. A. C. Stewart. 220 pp. 1957. {2nd Impression
1959.) 24s.

Martindale, Don. The Nature and Types of Sociological Theory. 292 pp.

1961. {2nd Impression 1965.) 35s.

Maus, Heinz. A Short History of Sociology. 234 pp. 1962. {2nd Impression

1965. ) 28s.

Myrdal, Gunnar. Value in Social Theory: A Collection of Essays on
Methodology. Edited by Paul Streeten. 332 pp. 1958. {2nd Impression

1962. ) 32s.

Ogburn, William F., and Nimkoff, Meyer F. A Handbook of Sociology.
Preface by Karl Mannheim. 656 pp. 46 figures. 38 tables. 5th edition
{revised) 1964. 40s.

Parsons, Talcott, and Smelser, Neil J. Economy and Society: A Study in the
Integration of Economic and Social Theory. 362 pp. 1956. {3rd
Impression 1964.) 35s.

Rex, John. Key Problems of Sociological Theory. 220 pp. 1961. {3rd Impres-
sion 1965.) 25s,

Stark, Werner. The Fundamental Forms of Social Thought. 280 pp. 1962. 32s.

FOREIGN CLASSICS OF SOCIOLOGY

Durkheim, Emile. Suicide. A Study in Sociology. Edited and with an Introduc-
tion by George Simpson. 404 pp. 1952. {2nd Impression 1963.) 30s.
Socialism and Saint-Simon. Edited with an Introduction by Alvin W.
Gouldner. Translated by Charlotte Sattler from the edition originally
edited with an Introduction by Marcel Mauss. 286 pp. 1959. 28s.
Professional Ethics and Civic Morals. Translated by Cornelia Brookfield.
288 pp. 1957. 30s.

Gerth, H. H., and Mills, C. Wright. From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology.

502pp. 1948. {5th Impression 1964.) 35s.

Tunnies, Ferdinand. Community and Association. {Gemeinschaft und Gesell-
schaft.) Translated and Supplemented by Charles P. Loomis. Foreword
by Pitirim A. Sorokin. 334 pp. 1955. 28s.

3

International Library of Sociology

SOCIAL STRUCTURE

Andrzejewski, Stanislaw. Military Organization and Society. With a Foreword
by Professor A. R. Radcliffe-Brown. 226 pp. 1 folder. 1954. 21s.

Cole, G. D. H. Studies in Class Structure. 220 pp. 1955. {. 3rd Impression

1964. ) 21s.

Coontz, Sydney H. Population Theories and the Economic Interpretation.
202 pp. 1957. { 2nd Impression 1961.) 25s.

Coser, Lewis. The Functions of Social Conflict. 204 pp. 1956. {2nd Impression

1965. ) ISs.

Glass, D. V. (Ed.). Social Mobility in Britain. Contributions by J. Berent,
T. Bottomore, R. C. Chambers, J. Floud, D. V. Glass, J. R. Hall, H. T.
Himmelweit, R. K. Kelsall, F. M. Martin, C. A. Moser, R. Mukherjee,
and W. Ziegel. 420 pp. 1954. {2nd Impression 1963.) 40s.

Kelsall, R. K. Higher Civil Servants in Britain : From 1 870 to the Present Day.
268 pp. 31 tables. 1955. 25s.

Marsh, David C. The Changing Social Structure in England and Wales,
1871-1961. 288 pp. 2nd edition 1965. In preparation.

Ossowski, Stanislaw. Class Structure in the Social Consciousness. 212 pp.
1963. 25s.

SOCIOLOGY AND POLITICS

Barbu, Zevedei. Democracy and Dictatorship: Their Psychology and Patterns
of Life. 300 pp. 1956.28s.

Crick, Bernard. The American Science of Politics: Its Origins and Con-
ditions. 284 pp. 1959. 28s.

Kornhauser, William. The Politics of Mass Society. 272 pp. 20 tables. 1960 •
{2nd Impression 1965.) 28s.

Laidler, Harry W. Social-Economic Movements: An Historical and Com-
parative Survey of Socialism, Communism, Co-operation, Utopianism;
and other Systems of Reform and Reconstruction. 864 pp. 16 plates,
1 figure. 1949. {3rd Impression 1960.) 50s.

Mannheim, Karl. Freedom, Power and Democratic Planning. Edited by Hans
Gerth and Ernest K. Bramstedt. 424 pp. 1951. {2nd Impression 1965.) 35s.
Mansur, Fatma. Process of Independence. Foreword by A. H. Hanson.
208pp. 1962.25s.

Martin, David A. Pacificism: an Historical and Sociological Study. 202 pp.
1965. 30s.

Myrdal, Gunnar. The Political Element in the Development of Economic
Theory. Translated from the German by Paul Streeten. 282 pp. 1953.
{4th Impression 1965.) 25s.

Polanyi, Michael, f.r.s. The Logic of Liberty: Reflections and Rejoinders.
228 pp. 1951. 18s.

Vemey, Douglas V. The Analysis of Political Systems. 264 pp. 1959. {3rd
Impression 1965.) 28s.

Wootton, Graham. The Politics of Influence: British Ex-Servicemen, Cabinet
Decisions and Cultural Changes, 1917 to 1957. 320 pp. 1963. 30s.

4

and Social Reconstruction

FOREIGN AFFAIRS: THEIR SOCIAL, POLITICAL AND
ECONOMIC FOUNDATIONS

Baer, Gabriel. Population and Society in the Arab East. Translated by Hanna
Szoke. 228 pp. 10 maps. 1964. 40s.

Bonne, Alfred. The Economic Development of the Middle East: An Outline
of Planned Reconstruction after the War. 192 pp. 58 tables. 1945. { 3rd
Impression 1953.) 16s.

State and Economics in the Middle East: A Society in Transition. 482 pp.

2nd {revised) edition 1955. {2nd Impression 1960.) 40s.

Studies in Economic Development: with special reference to Conditions
in the Under-developed Areas of Western Asia and India. 322 pp. 84
tables. 2nd edition 1960. 32s.

Mayer, J. P. Political Thought in France from the Revolution to the Fifth
Republic. 164 pp. 3rd edition {revised) 1961. 16s.

Schlesinger, Rudolf. Central European Democracy and its Background:

Economic and Political Group Organization. 432 pp. 1953. 40s.

Thomson, David Meyer E., and Briggs, A. Patterns of Peacemaking. 408 pp.
1945.25s.

Trouton, Ruth. Peasant Renaissance in Yugoslavia 1900-1950: A Study of
the Development of Yugoslav Peasant Society as affected by Education.
370 pp. 1 map. 1952. 28s.

CRIMINOLOGY

Ancel, Marc. Social Defence: A Modern Approach to Criminal Problems.
Foreword by Leon Radzinowicz. 240 pp. 1965. 32s.

Cloward, Richard A., and Ohlin, Lloyd E. Delinquency and Opportunity: A
1 Theory of Delinquent Gangs. 248 pp. 1961. 25s.

Downes, David. The Delinquent Solution. A Study in Sub-cultural Theory.
304 pp. 1965. 42s,

Dunlop, A. B., and McCabe, S. Young Men in Detention Centres. 192 pp.
1965. 28s.

Friedlander, Dr. Kate. The Psycho-Analytical Approach to Juvenile Delin-
quency: Theory, Case Studies, Treatment. 320 pp. 1947. {5th Impression
1961.) 28s.

Glucck, Sheldon and Eleanor. Family Environment and Delinquency. With
the statistical assistance of Rose W. Kneznek. 340 pp. 1962. 35s.
Mannheim, Hermann. Group Problems in Crime and Punishment, and other
Studies in Criminology and Criminal Law. 336 pp. 1955. 28s.

- Comparative Criminology: a Textbook. Two volumes, 416 pp. and 360 pp.
1965. 42s. each.

Morris, Terence. The Criminal Area: A Study in Social Ecology. Foreword
by Hermann Mannheim. 232 pp.-25 tables. 4 maps. 1957. 25s.

5

International Library of Sociology

Morris, Terence and Pauline, assisted by Barbara Barer. Pentonvillc: a
Sociological Study of an English Prison. 416 pp. 16 plates. 1963. 50s.

Spencer, John C. Crime and the Services. Foreword by Hermann Mannheim.
336 pp. 1954. 28s.

Trasler, Gordon. The Explanation of Criminality. 144 pp. 1962. 20s.

SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

Barbu, Zcvedci. Problems of Historical Psychology, 248 pp. 1960. 25s.
Blackburn, Julian. Psychology and the Social Pattern. 184 pp. 1945. ( 7th
Impression 1964.) 16s.

Fleming, C. M. Adolescence: Its Social Psychology: With an Introduction to
recent findings from the fields of Anthropology, Physiology, Medicine,
Psychometrics and Sociomctry. 271 pp. 2nd edition (revised) 1963. ( 2nd
Impression 1964.) 25s.

The Social Psychology of Education: An Introduction and Guide to Its
Study. 136 pp. 2nd edition (revised) 1959. 11s.

Fleming, C. M. (Ed.). Studies in the Social Psychology of Adolescence.
Contributions by J. E. Richardson, J. F. Forrester, J. K. Shukla and
P. J. Higginbotham. Foreword by the editor. 292 pp. 29 figures. 13 tables.
5 folder tables. 1951. 23s.

Halmos, Paul. Towards a Measure of Man: The Frontiers of Normal
Adjustment. 276 pp. 1957. 28s.

Homans, George C. The Human Group. Foreword by Bernard DeVoto.
Introduction by Robert K. Merton. 526 pp. 1951. (4th Impression 1965)
35s.

Social Behaviour: its Elementary Forms. 416 pp. 1961. 30s.

Klein, Josephine. The Study of Groups. 226 pp. 31 figures. 5 tables. 1956 >
(4th Impression 1965.) 21s.

Linton, Ralph. The Cultural Background of Personality. 132 pp. 1947. (5th
Impression 1965.) 16s.

Mayo, Elton. The Social Problems of an Industrial Civilization. With an
appendix on the Political Problem. 180 pp. 1949. (4th Impression 1961.)
18s.

Ridder, J. C. de. The Personality of the Urban African in South Africa. A
Thematic Apperception Test Study. 196 pp. 12 plates. 1961. 25s.

Rose, Arnold M. (Ed.). Mental Health and Mental Disorder: A Sociological
Approach. Chapters by 46 contributors. 654pp. 1956. 45s.

Human Behaviour and Social Processes: an Interactionist Approach.
Contributions by Arnold M. Ross, Ralph H. Turner, Anselm Strauss,
Everett C. Hughes, E. Franklin Frazier, Howard S. Becker, et al. 696 pp.
1962. 60s.

Smclscr, Neil J. Theory of Collective Behaviour. 448 pp. 1962. 45s.

Spinley, Dr. B. M. The Deprived and the Privileged: Personality Develop-
ment in English Society. 232pp. 1953. 20s.

Wolfenstein, Martlia. Disaster: A Psychological Essay. 264 pp. 1957. 23s.

6

and Social Reconstruction

Young, Professor Kimball. Personality and Problems of Adjustment, 742 pp.
12 figures, 9 tables, 2nd edition ( revised) 1952. (2nd Impression 1959.) 40s.
Handbook of Social Psychology. 658 pp. 16 figures. 10 tables. 2nd edition
(revised) 1957. (3rd Impression 1963.) 40s.

SOCIOLOGY OF THE FAMILY

Banks, J. A. Prosperity and Parenthood: A study of Family Planning among
the Victorian Middle Classes. 262 pp. 1954. (2nd Impression 1965.) 24s.
Chapman, Dennis. The Home and Social Status. 336 pp. 8 plates. 3 figures.
117 tables. 1955. 35s.

Klein, Josephine. Samples from English Cultures. 1965.

1. Three Preliminary Studies and Aspects of Adult Life in England. 447 pp.
50s.

2. Child-Rearing Practices and Index. 247 pp. 35s.

Klein, Viola. Britain’s Married Women Workers. 176 pp. 1965. 28s.

Myrdal, Alva and Klein, Viola. Women’s Two Roles: Home and Work.

238 pp. 27 tables. 1956. (2nd Impression 1962.) 25s.

Parsons, Talcott and Bales, Robert F. Family: Socialization and Interaction
Process. In collaboration with James Olds, Morris Zelditch and Philip E.
Slater. 456 pp. 50 figures and tables. 1956. (2nd Impression 1964.) 35s.

THE SOCIAL SERVICES

Ashdown, Margaret and Brown, S. Clement. Social Service and Mental
Health: An Essay on Psychiatric Social Workers. 280 pp. 1953. 21s.

Hall, M. Penelope. The Social Services of Modem England. 416 pp. 6th
edition (revised) 1963. (2nd Impression with a new Preface 1965.) 30s.
Hall, M. P., and Howes, I. V. The Church in Social Work. A Study of Moral
Welfare Work undertaken by the Church of England. 320 pp. 1965. 35s.
Heywood, Jean S. Children in Care: the Development of the Service for the
Deprived Child. 264 pp. 2nd edition (revised) 1965. 32s.

An Introduction to teaching Casework Skills. 192 pp. 1964. 28s.

Jones, Kathleen. Lunacy, Law and Conscience, 1744-1845: the Social
History of the Care of the Insane. 268 pp. 1955. 25s.

Mental Health and Social Policy, 1845-1959. 264 pp. 1960. 28s.

Jones, Kathleen and Sidebotham, Roy. Mental Hospitals at Work. 220 pp.
1962. 30s.

Kastell, Jean. Casework in Child Care. Foreword by M. Brooke Willis.
320 pp. 1962.35s.

Rooff, Madeline. Voluntary Societies and Social Policy. 350 pp. 15 tables.
, 1957. 35s.

Shenfield, B. E. Social Policies for Old Age: A Review of Social Provision
for Old Age in Great Britain. 260 pp. 39 tables. 1957. 25s.

7

International Library of Sociology

Schlesinger, Rudolf. Marx: His Time and Ours. 464 pp. 1950. (2nd Impression
1951.) 32s.

Stark, W. America: Ideal and Reality. The United States of 1776 in Con-
temporary Philosophy. 136 pp. 1947. 12s.

The Sociology of Knowledge: An Essay in Aid of a Deeper Understanding
of the History of Ideas. 384 pp. 1958. (2nd Impression 1960.) 36s.
Montesquieu: Pioneer of the Sociology of Knowledge. 244 pp. 1960. 25s.

URBAN SOCIOLOGY

Anderson, Nels. The Urban Community: A World Perspective. 532 pp. 1960.
35s.

Ashworth, William. The Genesis of Modem British Town Planning: A Study
in Economic and Social History of the Nineteenth and Twentieth
Centuries. 288 pp. 1954. (2nd Impression 1965.) 32s.

Bracey, Howard. Neighbours: Neighbouring and Neighbourliness on New
Estates and Subdivisions in England and the U.S:A. 220 pp. 1964. 28s.

Cullingworth, J. B. Housing Needs and Planning Policy: A Restatement of
the Problems of Housing Need and “Overspill” in England and Wales.
232 pp. 44 tables. 8 maps. 1960. 28s.

Dickinson, Robert E. City and Region: A Geographical Interpretation.
608 pp. 125 figures. 1964. 60s.

The West European City : A Geographical Interpretation. 600 pp. 129 maps.
29 plates. 2nd edition 1962. (2nd Impression 1963.) 55s.

Dore, R. P. City Life in Japan: A Study of a Tokyo Ward. 498 pp. 8 plates.
4 figures. 24 tables. 1958. (2nd Impression 1963.) 45s.

Jennings, Hilda. Societies in the Making: a Study of Development and Re-
development within a County Borough. Foreword by D. A. Clark.
286 pp. 1962. 32s.

Kerr, Madeline. The People of Ship Street, 240 pp. 1958. 23s.

Mann, P. H. An Approach to Urban Sociology. 240 pp. 1965. 30s.

Morris, R. N., and Mogey, J. The Sociology of Housing. Studies at Berins-
field. 232 pp. 4 pp. plates. 1965. 42s.

Rosser, C., and Harris, C. The Family and Social Change. A Study of Family
- and Kinship in a South Wales Town. 352 pp. 8 maps. 1965. 45s.

RURAL SOCIOLOGY

Bracey, H. E. English Rural Life: Village Activities, Organizations and
Institutions. 302 pp. 1959. 30s.

Infield, Henrik F. Co-operative Living in Palestine. With a Foreword by
General Sir Arthur Wauchope, G.C.B. 170 pp. 8 plates. 7 tables. 1946.
12s. 6d.

Littlejohn, James. Westrigg: the Sociology of a Cheviot Parish. 172 pp.
5 figures. 1963. 25s.

10

and Social Reconstruction

Saville, John. Rural Depopulation in England and Wales, 1851-1951. Fore-
word, by Leonard Elmhirst. 286 pp. 6 figures. 39 tables . 1 map. 1957. 28s.
{Dartington Hall Studies in Rural Sociology.)

Williams, W. M. The Country Craftsman: A Study of Some Rural Crafts and
the Rural Industries Organization in England. 248 pp. 9 figures. 1958.
, 25s. ( Dartington Hall Studies in Rural Sociology.)

The Sociology of an English Village: Gosforth. 272 pp. 12 figures. 13 tables.
1956. (3rd Impression 1964.) 25s.

SOCIOLOGY OF MIGRATION

Eisenstadt, S. N. The Absorption of Immigrants: a Comparative Study
based mainly on the Jewish Community in Palestine and the State of
Israel. 288 pp. 1954.28s.

SOCIOLOGY OF INDUSTRY AND DISTRIBUTION

Anderson, Nels. Work and Leisure. 280 pp. 1961. 28s.

Blau, Peter M., and Scott, W. Richard. Formal Organizations: a Comparative
' approach. Introduction and Additional Bibliography by J. H. Smith. 328 pp.
1963. ( 2nd Impression 1964.) 28s.

Jeffcrys, Margot, with the assistance of Winifred Moss. Mobility in the
Labour Market: Employment Changes in Battersea and Dagenham.
Preface by Barbara Wootton. 186 pp. 51 tables. 1954. 15s.

Levy, A. B. Private Corporations and Their Control. Two Volumes.
Vol. 1, 464 pp., Vol. 2, 432pp. 1950. 80s. the set.

Levy, Hermann. The Shops of Britain: A Study of Retail Distribution.
268pp. 1948. (2nd Impression 1949.) 21s.

Liepmann, Kate. The Journey to Work: Its Significance for Industrial and
Community Life. With a Foreword by A. M. Carr-Saunders. 230 pp.
40 tables. 3 folders. 1944. (2nd Impression 1945.) 18s.

Apprenticeship: An Enquiry into its Adequacy under Modern Conditions.

Foreword by H. D. Dickinson. 232 pp. 6 tables. 1960. ( 2nd Impression.)
. 23s.

Millerson, Geoffrey. The Qualifying Associations: a Study in Professionaliza-
tion. 320 pp. 1964. 42s.

Smelser, Neil J. Social Change in the Industrial Revolution: An Application
of Theory to the Lancashire Cotton Industry, 1770-1840. 468 pp.
12 figures. 14 tables. 1959. (2nd Impression 1960.) 40s.

Williams, Gertrude. Recruitment to Skilled Trades. 240 pp. 1957. 23s.

Young, A. F. Industrial Injuries Insurance: an Examination of British Policy.
192 pp. 1964. 30s.

11

International Library of Sociology

ANTHROPOLOGY
{Demy 8vo.)

Crook, David and Isabel. Revolution in a Chinese Village: Ten Mile Inn.
230 pp. 8 plates. 1 map. 1959. 21s.

The First Years of Yangyi Commune. 288 pp. 12 plates. 1965. 42s.

Dube, S. C. Indian Village. Foreword by Morris Edward Opler. 276 pp. 4
plates. 1955. ( 5th Impression. 1965.) 25s.

India’s Changing Villages: Human Factors in Community Development
260 pp. 8 plates. 1 map. 1958. (2nd Impression 1960.) 25s.

Fei, Hsiao-Tung. Peasant Life in China: a Field Study of Country Life in the
Yangtze Valley. Foreword by Bronislaw Malinowski. 320 pp. 14 plates.
1939. ( 5th Impression 1962.) 30s.

Firth, Raymond. Malay Fishermen. Their Peasant Economy. 420 pp. 17 pp.
plates. 2nd edition (revised and enlarged 1965.) 55s.

Gulliver, P. H. The Family Herds. A Study of two Pastoral Tribes in East
Africa, The Jie and Turkana. 304 pp. 4 plates. 19 figures. 1955. 25s.

Social Control in an African Society: a Study of the Arusha, Agricultural
Masai of Northern Tanganyika. 320 pp. 8 plates. 10 figures. 1963. 35s.

Hogbin, Ian. Transformation Scene. The Changing Culture of a New Guinea
Village. 340 pp. 22 plates. 2 maps. 1951. 30s.

Hsu, Francis L. K. Under the Ancestors’ Shadow: Chinese Culture and
Personality. 346 pp. 26 figures. 1949. 21s.

Lowie, Professor Robert H. Social Organization. 494 pp. 1950. (3rd Impression
1962.) 35s.

Maunier, Rene. The Sociology of Colonies: An Introduction to the Study
of Race Contact. Edited and translated by E. O. Lorimer. 2 Volumes.
Vol. 1, 430 pp. Vol. 2, 356 pp. 1949. 70s. the set.

Mayer, Adrian C. Caste and Kinship in Central India: A Village and its
Region, 328 pp. 16 plates. 15 figures. 16 tables. 1960. (2nd Impression
1965.) 35s.

Peasants in the Pacific: A Study of Fiji Indian Rural Society. 232 pp.
16 plates. 10 figures. 14 tables. 1961. 35s.

Osborne, Harold. Indians of the Andes: Aymaras and Quccbuas, 292 pp.
8 plates. 2 maps. 1952. 25s.

Smith, Raymond T. The Negro Family in British Guiana: Family Structure
and Social Status in the Villages. With a Foreword by Meyer Fortes.
314 pp. 8 plates. 1 figure. 4 maps. 1956. ( 2nd Impression 1965.) 28s.

12

and Social Reconstruction

DOCUMENTARY
( Demy 8vo .)

Meek, Dorothea L. (Ed.). Soviet Youth: Some Achievements and Problems.
Excerpts from the Soviet Press, translated by the editor. 280 pp. 1957. 28s.

Schlesinger, Rudolf (Ed.). Changing Attitudes in Soviet Russia.

1. The Family in the U.S.S.R. Documents and Readings, with an Intro-

duction by the editor. 434 pp. 1949. 30s.

2. The Nationalities Problem and Soviet Administration. Selected
Readings on the Development of Soviet Nationalities Policies.
Introduced by the editor. Translated by TV. W. Gottlieb. 324 pp. 1956.

. 30s.

- Reports
of the Institute
of Community Studies

^ ( Demy 8vo .)

Cartwright, Ann. Human Relations and Hospital Care. 272 pp. 1964. 30s.
Jackson, Brian. Streaming: an Education System- in Miniature. 168 pp. 1964.
21s. Paper 10s.

Jackson, Brian and Marsden, Dennis. Education and the Working Class:
Some General Themes raised by a Study of 88 Working-class Children
in a Northern Industrial City. 268 pp. 2 folders. 1962. { 3rd Impression
1965.) 28s.

Marris, Peter. Widows and their Families. Foreword by Dr. John Bowlby.
184 pp. 18 tables. Statistical Summary. 1958. 18s.

Family and Social Change in an African City. A Study of Rehousing in
Lagos. 196 pp. 1 map. 4 plates. 53 tables. 1961. 25s.

The Experience of Higher Education. 232 pp. 27 tables. 1964. 25s.

Mills, Enid. Living with Mental Illness: a Study in East London. Foreword
by Morris Carstairs. 196 pp. 1962. 28s.

Runciman, W. G. Relative Deprivation and Social Justice. 344 pp. 1966. 40s.

Townsend, Peter. The Family Life of Old People: An Inquiry in East London.
Foreword by J. 11. Sheldon. 300 pp. 3 figures. 63 tables. 1957. { 2nd
Impression 1961.) 30s.

Willmott, Peter. The Evolution of a Community: a study of Dagenham after
forty years. 168 pp. 2 maps. 1963. 21s.

Willmott, Peter and Young, Michael. Family and Class in a London Suburb.
202 pp. 47 tables. 1960. {2nd Impression 1961.) 21s.

Young, Michael. Innovation and Research in Education. 192 pp. 1965. 25s.

Young, Michael and Willmott, Peter. Family and Kinship in East London.
Foreword by Richard M. Titmuss. 252 pp. 39 tables. 1957. {3rd Impression
1965.) 25s.

The British Journal of Sociology. Edited by Terence P. Morris. Vol. 1, No. 1,
March 1950 and Quarterly. Roy 8vo., £2 10s. p.a.; 12s. 6d. a number,
post free.

All prices are net and subject to alteration without notice